Live House of Commons

:00:00. > :00:09.this exceptionally difficult and trying time. Point of order. Mr Ian

:00:10. > :00:14.Blackford. I am delighted as I rise to make a point of order that the

:00:15. > :00:20.Immigration Minister is in his seat. I would like to refer to an urgent

:00:21. > :00:25.question and I would say in good faith when the Minister of

:00:26. > :00:34.immigration responded, that he indicated that a family came to the

:00:35. > :00:39.UK after the post works these had been removed. I wanted to make the

:00:40. > :00:44.point and ask him to clarify his remarks because the family were

:00:45. > :00:51.granted a visa to come to the UK on the 20th of December 2010, so before

:00:52. > :00:55.the post study work these had started. I have always argued that

:00:56. > :01:02.this family should be given the right to work here while they fulfil

:01:03. > :01:20.the demands of the Visa. I have sought to display my usual

:01:21. > :01:24.generosity of spirit to an exceptionally dedicated and

:01:25. > :01:28.assiduous constituency member, which the honourable gentleman undoubtedly

:01:29. > :01:35.is, however he will take it in the right spirit if I say that was not a

:01:36. > :01:39.point of order. It was patented not addressed in any meaningful sense to

:01:40. > :01:46.and could not be intended for the chair. It was a request to the

:01:47. > :01:49.Minister on the Treasury bench. Accordingly, it is best

:01:50. > :01:56.communicated, directly to the Minister in writing or through a

:01:57. > :02:02.meeting rather than across the floor of the House. On this one occasion

:02:03. > :02:06.and this one occasion only, and I realise the seriousness of the

:02:07. > :02:12.matter, I will say that if the Minister wants very briefly to

:02:13. > :02:17.respond, even only to indicate a willingness to engage, so be it. The

:02:18. > :02:20.honourable gentleman should give me notice of attention to raise such an

:02:21. > :02:31.order. Mr Speaker I am content to write to

:02:32. > :02:35.the honourable gentleman on the point he has raised so I am able to

:02:36. > :02:42.consider it properly. Thank you, I hope the Orrell will gentleman is

:02:43. > :02:46.satisfied for now. If there are no other points for ordered the clerk

:02:47. > :02:54.will proceed. The crime bill to be further considered. Thank you, we

:02:55. > :02:58.continue with clause 48 with which it will be convenient to consider

:02:59. > :03:05.the other new clauses, new schedules and amendments listed on the paper.

:03:06. > :03:14.To move clause 408I called the Minister of State, Minister Mike

:03:15. > :03:18.Penning. You are generous and not reading out all the new clauses and

:03:19. > :03:23.amendments because we may have been the some considerable time. Can I

:03:24. > :03:28.start my opening comments by saying genuinely how this will has

:03:29. > :03:34.progressed with the respect of both sides of the House in a genuine way.

:03:35. > :03:38.There are, if I can briefly make some opening comments and then I

:03:39. > :03:42.will naturally despond towards the end of this time slot, Mr Speaker,

:03:43. > :03:47.to comments from colleagues around the House. Cause there are some

:03:48. > :03:53.amendments in this group I thought it was only right and proper I

:03:54. > :03:57.address some of those. I address some of the shadow Secretary Of

:03:58. > :04:00.State elements as well and we have had numerous meetings and will try

:04:01. > :04:08.to work our way through this. Let's see if we can carry that forward as

:04:09. > :04:11.best we can. The intention is to have a robust and independent

:04:12. > :04:17.inspection regime for the Fire and Rescue Service in England. New

:04:18. > :04:19.clause 48 and new schedule one will support the objective of

:04:20. > :04:26.strengthening the framework currently provided by the Fire And

:04:27. > :04:31.Rescue Services act of 2004. This provides for an inspector which will

:04:32. > :04:35.be required and appeared to prepare a programme of inspection for the

:04:36. > :04:41.Fire And Rescue Services. The Secretary Of State will be able to

:04:42. > :04:44.ask for outside the public programme if necessary. They will be required

:04:45. > :04:50.to produce reports on the inspections and the chief will make

:04:51. > :04:54.an annual report to this House, to Parliament, something that does not

:04:55. > :04:57.take place now. He will carry out joint inspection works with the

:04:58. > :05:02.inspector of Constabulary and this is important where Police And Crime

:05:03. > :05:06.Commissioners and Mitt Romney 's take on the fire and rescue

:05:07. > :05:12.responsibilities. Finally this will make sure they have access to the

:05:13. > :05:14.information they need to undertake rigorous inspection of Fire and

:05:15. > :05:19.rescue authorities and the persons employed by them. That means no door

:05:20. > :05:23.will be locked and all information will be available to the Inspector.

:05:24. > :05:28.While we believe the vast majority of inspections to be undertaken with

:05:29. > :05:31.consent we need to be alert to the fact there might be additional

:05:32. > :05:36.powers if needed which means literally F and Inspector does not

:05:37. > :05:43.get the access they feel the deserve and need to provide a report they

:05:44. > :05:50.have the powers to pass for a quote. They will be more transparent, more

:05:51. > :05:56.accountable... I give way. As a former holder of this part of his

:05:57. > :06:01.post I entirely welcome and support these amendments. The Inspector and

:06:02. > :06:05.the authority is a good idea but may I raise one technical issue? It is

:06:06. > :06:12.provision for delegation at the moment to another public body, many

:06:13. > :06:17.of us think it would be much better if the schedule was so phrased as to

:06:18. > :06:22.permit the use of external contractors to carry out certain

:06:23. > :06:24.elements of the inspection on behalf of inspectors we are the those

:06:25. > :06:29.outside expertise which may not be readily available in a public body

:06:30. > :06:32.which at the moment the wording both in the main cause and in the

:06:33. > :06:39.schedule does not appear to allow delegation to an external contractor

:06:40. > :06:45.who may well have expertise in audit to make it robust and independent,

:06:46. > :06:49.could you reflect on that? Can he exclude from his intervention

:06:50. > :06:54.anything he thought that many time or any GP may be material and I have

:06:55. > :06:59.a sense that when he practised law on a regular basis he operated in a

:07:00. > :07:05.similar vein. Minister. I understand where he is coming from however, at

:07:06. > :07:11.the moment we do not feel there are a need for external specialists in

:07:12. > :07:15.that sort of way. If we find out later on the is the Inspector could

:07:16. > :07:24.come to the Home Secretary and ask for those specific needs. There is

:07:25. > :07:27.enough in the Fire Service to make sure this regime works, it is

:07:28. > :07:34.completely different to the one that explains that the moment. Thank you

:07:35. > :07:40.for giving way. Another former Fire Minister. There was a tradition we

:07:41. > :07:44.were West Ham United reporters but sadly that was broken by the

:07:45. > :07:49.honourable gentleman! And he explain having got away to the National

:07:50. > :07:53.Audit Office and know nothing now we are going back to the Fire Services

:07:54. > :07:58.Inspectorate, as he taken into account UCAS, the national

:07:59. > :08:03.application servers? Along the lines of what he said that giving external

:08:04. > :08:08.advice to the Inspectorate and will be new Chief Inspector DD National

:08:09. > :08:14.advisor for fire which was the position that was created? Can he

:08:15. > :08:20.explain a little of the background? I am conscious I am in the hands of

:08:21. > :08:28.experts who were ministers before I was. I was surprised when I came

:08:29. > :08:33.into the road to see how the inspections to lease. It was not as

:08:34. > :08:37.I envisaged when he brought it through. There was a general field

:08:38. > :08:42.that they had to address the costs and how it was done but frankly and

:08:43. > :08:46.to be perfectly honest, it has not worked. It cannot have the situation

:08:47. > :08:51.we have at the moment we are one Fire and rescue force inspects

:08:52. > :08:57.another and tells them what they can and cannot expect. This is separate

:08:58. > :09:01.which is why we have done it alongside the Inspectorate of

:09:02. > :09:07.Constabulary and the new inspector will tell us exactly what expertise

:09:08. > :09:09.is required especially as ex-firefighters like the payroll of

:09:10. > :09:15.us are what they need to be looking at. The area around the financial

:09:16. > :09:21.side of how it is working is an area of expertise but I accept some areas

:09:22. > :09:27.will need to have expertise from other areas. I promise not to

:09:28. > :09:31.trouble him any more but can he clarify for me, I agree with his

:09:32. > :09:37.response to the member opposite that can he clarify is he saying if

:09:38. > :09:39.evidence is resented ministers will not rule out making an appropriate

:09:40. > :09:44.arrangement whereby commissioning can take these were the chief

:09:45. > :09:50.inspector things it is appropriate to do so in relation to any

:09:51. > :09:53.inspection that won't require us to come back and make any arrangements

:09:54. > :09:58.in this House because that would defeat the object as I am trying to

:09:59. > :10:03.understand. Categorically we do not want to put a handcuff on the

:10:04. > :10:05.Inspector. If the Inspector needs additional expertise and to bring

:10:06. > :10:10.that in whether from Newcastle brothers then that is for them to

:10:11. > :10:15.bring to the ministers responsible. They would not be a requirement to

:10:16. > :10:19.come to this House. I think this is a really positive move for the Fire

:10:20. > :10:23.Service which has been welcomed by the Chiefs and in the meetings I

:10:24. > :10:27.have had with envy are very supportive. I am not sure every

:10:28. > :10:30.single one is because obviously the ones who are not might not be

:10:31. > :10:39.banging so hard on my door as the one to wear. I will come back later

:10:40. > :10:43.if we have time. Can I briefly touch on DNA and fingerprint retention?

:10:44. > :10:49.This is an important and sensitive area. The new clauses 49 and 50

:10:50. > :10:54.would help prevent and detect crime with the any and fingerprint

:10:55. > :11:01.retained on databases outside of England and Wales in the same way as

:11:02. > :11:06.the material could be used if they had the crime taking place inside

:11:07. > :11:10.England and Wales. This is to protect the public and will only be

:11:11. > :11:14.in place for offences which are specific which would have been an

:11:15. > :11:19.offence inside England and Wales, whether they have taken place

:11:20. > :11:23.outside England and Wales. It is something which has been requested

:11:24. > :11:30.and the amendments have been made to clauses 49 and 50 will enhance the

:11:31. > :11:35.effectiveness of DNA and fingerprint databases and help our police keep

:11:36. > :11:41.us safe which is something I am sure we want to do to regularly with the

:11:42. > :11:49.heightened threat we have. New clauses 51, 52 and new clause to the

:11:50. > :11:53.play strength arrest provided by the criminal Justice and order act and

:11:54. > :11:59.appears to have support from around the House on that. Can I briefly

:12:00. > :12:03.touch because I specifically want to listen to the Shadow Home Secretary

:12:04. > :12:07.is my comments in his work, the amendments we have discussed with

:12:08. > :12:15.the leasing Minister and the Home Secretary has discussed as well, in

:12:16. > :12:21.the main B1 to hear... It may assist the House if I say a few words. We

:12:22. > :12:27.welcome a constructive approach from the opposition and particularly from

:12:28. > :12:31.the Hillsborough families in this case and the campaign groups. We

:12:32. > :12:36.would not be talking here about these issues now without the bravery

:12:37. > :12:39.of the health brat families and the Hillsborough campaign. It would not

:12:40. > :12:44.have happened and I would not be standing here so I particularly want

:12:45. > :12:49.to praise them at this stage. The work carries on, it will more stop

:12:50. > :12:55.whatever happens today. The Shadow Home Secretary identified a

:12:56. > :12:58.number... Of course. I would like to thank the Minister for giving way.

:12:59. > :13:05.He has just mentioned the health brat families some of whom are here

:13:06. > :13:12.today to hear the Minister's words. Will he give categoric assurances to

:13:13. > :13:17.them that this sort of thing could never happen again given the new

:13:18. > :13:23.clause, 63? Go Minister could stand that this dispatch box and give

:13:24. > :13:28.categoric assurances in this way but what we have done is moved

:13:29. > :13:32.enormously forward with the Home Secretary's perseverance along with

:13:33. > :13:36.the shadow Secretary Of State. We are in any position here and are

:13:37. > :13:38.trying as hard as we possibly can to make sure these terrible situations

:13:39. > :13:45.never happen again without consequential effects in other parts

:13:46. > :13:47.so I cannot categorically do what he is asking but he will understand

:13:48. > :13:54.we'd I am coming from other work will disappoint him. I will be as

:13:55. > :13:59.helpful as I possibly can. We recognise the strength of feeling on

:14:00. > :14:02.these issues and ensure police officers who commit the most serious

:14:03. > :14:08.acts of wrongdoing can be held to account and that actions, no matter

:14:09. > :14:11.when they come to light. We are not talking about criminal acts. If it

:14:12. > :14:17.is a criminal action it can be born against individuals but we are

:14:18. > :14:20.looking at actions against a police officer, disciplinary actions. On

:14:21. > :14:25.that basis and I am looking very carefully at what the shadow

:14:26. > :14:27.secretary has it down in his amendments and the discussions I

:14:28. > :14:31.have had with the Shadow police Minister. He will bring forward in

:14:32. > :14:35.the House of lords that we will be able to extend the 12 month time

:14:36. > :14:40.limit reposed in the bill in exceptional circumstances to

:14:41. > :14:47.unlimited. That is in understanding the have not completely opened up to

:14:48. > :14:50.every offence. We will work within regulations with the Shadow Home

:14:51. > :14:55.Secretary and his team and I hope the Hillsborough families and Bishop

:14:56. > :14:59.James to see how these regulations can be drafted so that we can make

:15:00. > :15:05.sure that it does what it says on the tin. We will keep the 12 month

:15:06. > :15:08.rule but in exceptional circumstances, based on

:15:09. > :15:18.recommendations, we will be able to look at historical challenges. Not

:15:19. > :15:22.criminal, that is a different side, but in what actions against a former

:15:23. > :15:27.police officer. A 12 month limit will remain but we will work on the

:15:28. > :15:33.regulations. That is a significant move on our behalf. This will apply

:15:34. > :15:38.to police officers serving with the police force at the point of these

:15:39. > :15:41.provisions coming into force. We do not believe it should be applied

:15:42. > :15:47.retrospectively but I believe this is a significant move so families

:15:48. > :15:53.going forward will have the sort of addiction be would want. In relation

:15:54. > :15:57.to new clause 66, in relation to the police and the media, and would like

:15:58. > :16:00.to assure the House that the consultation that is going on at the

:16:01. > :16:05.moment which we discussed with the shadow team and the College of

:16:06. > :16:08.leasing is actively looking at guidance in this particular area. I

:16:09. > :16:13.will not predict what they can account for but I wouldn't be

:16:14. > :16:20.looking at it. We will wait for the colleagues to come forward. New

:16:21. > :16:24.clauses 63 and 65 about the support to fans which I now is the really

:16:25. > :16:32.important area and something we are looking at. The Home Secretary has

:16:33. > :16:34.asked Bishop James to look into the report not just around this

:16:35. > :16:39.financial area but the whole aspect of how we could improve and better

:16:40. > :16:45.so the families don't go through that sort of situation ever again.

:16:46. > :16:56.They will wait for Bishop James's report. What ever happens in the

:16:57. > :17:01.House afternoon, the matter will not stop there. We will still work with

:17:02. > :17:11.Bishop James and wait for the report. In relation to new clause

:17:12. > :17:18.64, the Government has made it clear on many occasions that we've will

:17:19. > :17:25.wait for the criminal proceedings that are still ongoing and then the

:17:26. > :17:29.Home Secretary will come forward. There are lots of other amendments

:17:30. > :17:31.within that we can discuss but I wanted to try to set out the

:17:32. > :17:47.Government's position. Inspection of fire and rescue

:17:48. > :17:55.authorities. The question is that the Government new clause 48 B read

:17:56. > :18:02.a second time. I would like to begin by agreeing with the Minister that

:18:03. > :18:07.some good progress has been made in the course of our deliberations on

:18:08. > :18:13.this bill. Improvements that we will discuss later in terms of tackling

:18:14. > :18:17.child sexual exploitation, improvements to the police bail

:18:18. > :18:26.regime, particularly as it applies to suspects suspected of being

:18:27. > :18:30.involved in counterterrorism activity and progress on police

:18:31. > :18:36.misconduct, which I will come onto. I would argue that this bill

:18:37. > :18:39.presents an opportunity to do much more to improve police

:18:40. > :18:46.accountability and it is an opportunity that we need to grab.

:18:47. > :18:51.Today I want to present a package of amendments which respond to the

:18:52. > :18:56.historic verdict of the Hillsborough inquest that finally concluded,

:18:57. > :19:00.after 27 years, what the families had known from day one that the loss

:19:01. > :19:03.of their loved ones was not an accident, but they had been

:19:04. > :19:08.unlawfully killed but that fact had been covered up for all of those

:19:09. > :19:14.years. This package seeks to rebalance this country to make it

:19:15. > :19:18.fairer. Rebalance it away from the establishment and in the favour of

:19:19. > :19:23.ordinary families. A package that will stand as a permanent tribute to

:19:24. > :19:25.the dignity and determination of the Hillsborough families because

:19:26. > :19:31.knowing them, they would want nothing more than knowing that no

:19:32. > :19:36.other family should go through what they have gone through. There is a

:19:37. > :19:41.package of amendments here and let me take the House briefly through

:19:42. > :19:47.them. New clause 63 would give bereaved families equal legal

:19:48. > :19:51.funding for representation at inquests where the police are

:19:52. > :19:55.involved. It seeks to establish that crucible principle that there should

:19:56. > :20:00.be parity between the two sides and the reason why that is important is

:20:01. > :20:04.because that says clearly that the public interest lies in finding the

:20:05. > :20:10.truth and that is how public resources should be directed. Public

:20:11. > :20:23.resources should not be directed to create an unbalanced inquest. I am

:20:24. > :20:26.happy to confirm that the Liberal Democrats will support this

:20:27. > :20:30.amendment and does he agree with me that had this been in place at the

:20:31. > :20:33.time of the first inquest, then the truth might have emerged at that

:20:34. > :20:39.stage rather than the families having to go through such a dire

:20:40. > :20:51.long way to get to the truth? I am grateful to the honourable gentleman

:20:52. > :20:55.for his support tonight. I think he is absolutely right and for calm on

:20:56. > :21:03.to explain precisely how this would have helped even the playing field

:21:04. > :21:07.and give the families the chance to get truth at the first time of

:21:08. > :21:14.asking. The original inquest catastrophically failed on that

:21:15. > :21:20.account and that needs to be very clearly understood as we considered

:21:21. > :21:27.this amendment tonight. Amendment 126 seeks to close the loophole of

:21:28. > :21:34.retirements being used as a route to evade misconduct proceedings by

:21:35. > :21:39.police officers. New clause 64 seeks to hold the Government to its

:21:40. > :21:44.promise to the victim 's press intrusion, to hold a second stage

:21:45. > :21:49.enquiry looking at the culture of relations between police and the

:21:50. > :21:55.press. New clause 66 seeks to legislate for a code of practice

:21:56. > :22:01.with regard to the media relations policy of each individual police

:22:02. > :22:06.force and seeks to spell out that unattributable briefings by police

:22:07. > :22:12.forces as was so damaging in the case of Hillsborough is not

:22:13. > :22:17.permitted unless it is in the most exceptional circumstances.

:22:18. > :22:22.Amendments 127 seeks to strengthen the IPC C. New clause 67 which will

:22:23. > :22:27.be considered later seeks to strengthen the offence of misconduct

:22:28. > :22:37.in public office. Let me go through those amendments and I will start

:22:38. > :22:43.with the area where there is greatest consensus and that is on

:22:44. > :22:48.police misconduct. I listened carefully to what the Minister had

:22:49. > :22:52.to say and I am grateful for the movement that he indicated to my

:22:53. > :22:56.honourable friend in committee that there should not just be an

:22:57. > :23:01.arbitrator for month period after retirement because as we know,

:23:02. > :23:06.police wrongdoing may come to light much later than that. We are glad

:23:07. > :23:11.that the Government has indicated that it is prepared to move on this

:23:12. > :23:17.matter in the Other Place and bring an amendment to that effect. While I

:23:18. > :23:21.will not push my amendment tonight I would still like to press the

:23:22. > :23:24.Minister further because he is saying that that should be applied

:23:25. > :23:30.in the most exceptional circumstances, but that seems to me

:23:31. > :23:36.to rule out potentially many people who might be guilty of gross

:23:37. > :23:40.misconduct but who then would not apply under his exceptional test. I

:23:41. > :23:48.think he needs to reassure the House on this particular point. That is

:23:49. > :23:57.why I offered to work closely with colleagues across the House on the

:23:58. > :23:59.regulations. We don't bring everybody in but clearly understand

:24:00. > :24:06.what exceptional is is very important. That in fact is a good

:24:07. > :24:10.offer and I thank the Minister for it. I think we can move forward on

:24:11. > :24:16.that basis. Hopefully we all know what we are trying to achieve here

:24:17. > :24:25.and that is is serious wrongdoing comes to light about as individual

:24:26. > :24:29.who is beyond 12 months retired it must be possible that proceedings

:24:30. > :24:35.can be initiated. The amendment we have got down to Knight says it

:24:36. > :24:39.should also be sanctions that will be applied to that individual and we

:24:40. > :24:44.will want to insist on that point as well. If we can therefore agreed to

:24:45. > :24:48.move forward on that basis, that for me seems to be like a considerable

:24:49. > :24:53.piece of progress that I never matters greatly to the Hillsborough

:24:54. > :24:57.families who felt very aggrieved as they were continuing their struggle,

:24:58. > :25:04.when they saw individuals retired on a full pension and who they felt

:25:05. > :25:08.were beyond reach and could not be held to account. Misconduct is

:25:09. > :25:18.misconduct whenever it occurred and people should be held to account for

:25:19. > :25:25.their action. For the Minister for coming partly to the position that

:25:26. > :25:32.we believe should be taken, can we clarify one point. What we are

:25:33. > :25:36.talking about is some serious, gross misconduct for police officers and

:25:37. > :25:40.because we have mentioned Hillsborough, fair many people who

:25:41. > :25:42.will spin that in regard to the conduct of officers, ordered Terri

:25:43. > :25:52.officers at the Hillsborough disaster. In regards to ordinary

:25:53. > :25:57.officers, there were no allegations against officers who performed

:25:58. > :26:01.locally. It was the senior officers who let people down and then use the

:26:02. > :26:07.opportunity to get away scot-free in regard to the copout of using ill

:26:08. > :26:12.health. If the honourable gentleman wishes to make a speech he can stand

:26:13. > :26:17.up when he wishes to indicate to do so but this is an intervention and

:26:18. > :26:25.they must be shorter than that. It was a long one but it was a good one

:26:26. > :26:31.and it was a very important point that my honourable friend was

:26:32. > :26:36.making. I don't think there is any attempt here to blame ordinary

:26:37. > :26:43.policemen and women and that is not the purpose of this amendment. It is

:26:44. > :26:46.important for me to say very clearly today to those police officers out

:26:47. > :26:52.there now keeping the streets safe that this is not an attack on them

:26:53. > :26:56.and the point about this package is, this is about not allowing those

:26:57. > :27:01.misdeeds in the past to take the present and to taint police officers

:27:02. > :27:05.working today. That is such a crucial important point because if

:27:06. > :27:11.you don't deal, if you don't deal properly with those allegations, you

:27:12. > :27:17.allow it to contaminate the present and corrode trust in today's police

:27:18. > :27:21.service and that is something that none of us in this House want. My

:27:22. > :27:26.honourable friend was right to make the point that he did and that

:27:27. > :27:35.cannot be stressed enough in bringing these amendments tonight.

:27:36. > :27:40.The point that his colleague was making it absolutely right. If we

:27:41. > :27:44.had not put the exceptional circumstances in, those sorts of

:27:45. > :27:49.people could have been possibly captured and that is not what we are

:27:50. > :27:53.looking at. What we are looking at is the people who should be brought

:27:54. > :27:59.to justice and that is exactly what we should do. That is right. This is

:28:00. > :28:05.about people who have been guilty of serious misconduct in the course of

:28:06. > :28:11.their holding of public office and it is crucial that they cannot use

:28:12. > :28:17.retirement as a means of evading accountability for that misconduct.

:28:18. > :28:25.This change that the Minister appears to be agreeing to tonight

:28:26. > :28:29.Ashley closes a very long-standing loophole and frustration for members

:28:30. > :28:34.of the public. It does expose the police to considerably more

:28:35. > :28:39.challenging regime but rightly so. Any profession needs to be held

:28:40. > :28:44.accountable to the highest standard, so he is right. We will work with

:28:45. > :28:49.him to get it right but I believe we can, but I stress again, this is

:28:50. > :28:55.about upholding the reputation of the vast majority of police officers

:28:56. > :29:05.who serve the public and serve it with distinction. If I may move onto

:29:06. > :29:11.police press relations. To be honest, I think this is the biggest

:29:12. > :29:15.area of unfinished... We haven't even started to make any changes

:29:16. > :29:21.with respect to putting right the wrongs of Hillsborough because as we

:29:22. > :29:28.know, that briefing of the press in those first days after the tragedy

:29:29. > :29:34.caused incalculable harm and damage, not just to the families who had

:29:35. > :29:36.lost loved ones but actually to the thousands of people like my

:29:37. > :29:43.honourable friend who had returned from the match in the state of

:29:44. > :29:50.trauma, only to read a couple of days later that the police were

:29:51. > :29:59.blaming them for the death of their friends. And their family. That is

:30:00. > :30:04.why feelings are so strong on this matter. Not just in Merseyside but

:30:05. > :30:13.across the country. It cannot be right that a police force is able to

:30:14. > :30:16.unattributable you to brief malicious information, unproven

:30:17. > :30:24.information to a newspaper. That simply cannot be right and it must

:30:25. > :30:28.be the case that we need a more, a stronger and more transparent regime

:30:29. > :30:35.for press relations so that fourth impressions cannot be put out there

:30:36. > :30:38.with the intention of setting a narrative about a particular

:30:39. > :30:45.incident, because families who are fighting for justice can often find

:30:46. > :30:48.that it is very difficult then to overturn the false version of

:30:49. > :30:53.events. That was certainly the case for the Hillsborough families. I

:30:54. > :30:59.totally agree with the points he is making but does he also agree with

:31:00. > :31:03.me that one of the problems with Hillsborough was not just the off

:31:04. > :31:08.record briefings but the on record briefings to get the narrative right

:31:09. > :31:16.from the beginning which was part of the problem? I agree on both levels.

:31:17. > :31:19.This was a cover-up that was perpetrated on the record, off the

:31:20. > :31:28.record, in the committee rooms of this House. It went to the very top,

:31:29. > :31:34.even to number ten Downing St. The head of press at the time briefed

:31:35. > :31:40.tank top mob that caused the disaster. This cover-up went to the

:31:41. > :31:45.highest level and what chance to ordinary families have when faced

:31:46. > :31:53.with the might of the establishment seeking to perpetrate a lie on that

:31:54. > :31:58.scale? It's a 27 year fight as we now know. This whole area is a major

:31:59. > :32:15.unfinished piece of business. It is why we have suggested new

:32:16. > :32:20.clause 66. He said he will work with us on new clause 66 and with the

:32:21. > :32:25.College of the leasing and with the end PCC to get this right and I do

:32:26. > :32:30.believe my honourable friend the lease Minister is having useful

:32:31. > :32:36.discussions with them. They have responded in this area and they have

:32:37. > :32:44.looked at the proper conduct the law of and we want to work with him to

:32:45. > :32:48.get this absolutely right. If you look at a number of injustices down

:32:49. > :32:53.the years there was an uncommon thread Europe where an unhealthy

:32:54. > :32:55.relationship between police and press cancel the seeds for a

:32:56. > :33:06.cover-up which becomes very difficult to overturn. Let me now

:33:07. > :33:12.turn to new clause 64 which invites the House to reinforce the wrongness

:33:13. > :33:22.that was made by the Prime Minister to the victims of press intrusion.

:33:23. > :33:29.Let me go back to what was said. In November 20 12th the PM said this,

:33:30. > :33:32.when I set out the inquiry, the leathers and inquiry, I also said

:33:33. > :33:38.they would eat a second part to investigate wrongdoing in the press

:33:39. > :33:42.and the lease. We remain committed to the inquiry as it was first

:33:43. > :33:47.established. It is right that it should go ahead and that is truly

:33:48. > :33:54.our intention. It was put to me that that wrongness was made face to face

:33:55. > :33:57.before some of the victims of hacking and press intrusion, people

:33:58. > :34:06.such as the McCanns and the family of Milly Dowler. It seems to us on

:34:07. > :34:09.this side of the House that the government has subtly shifted its

:34:10. > :34:14.position in the intervening years. As we just heard a moment ago from

:34:15. > :34:20.the Minister, it is not a question of when the inquiry will go ahead at

:34:21. > :34:24.if it will go ahead. The government are announcing that following the

:34:25. > :34:28.conclusion of the outstanding investigations of this matter we

:34:29. > :34:35.will then take a decision whether or not the second stage inquiry will go

:34:36. > :34:39.ahead. I give way to my right honourable friend the chair of the

:34:40. > :34:43.home affairs select committee. Thank you for giving way. The promise was

:34:44. > :34:49.not just made to the victims and their families but also to the

:34:50. > :34:56.chairs of the select committees in the room before the inquiry was

:34:57. > :35:01.announced and he has absolutely right that it is important we get

:35:02. > :35:05.Levenson, too. They be not with Levenson, with somebody else because

:35:06. > :35:09.Levenson has moved on to do other things. There is nothing wrong with

:35:10. > :35:13.the government beginning the process, choosing the chair of the

:35:14. > :35:17.committee, getting the Mechanic 's together, we don't really have to

:35:18. > :35:22.wait for the end of the criminal proceedings. I would wholeheartedly

:35:23. > :35:27.agree with my honourable friend, Madam Deputy Speaker, because there

:35:28. > :35:35.is a huge amount of unfinished business here. We know that these

:35:36. > :35:39.issues are present in so many of the injustices that we see with their

:35:40. > :35:44.has been inappropriate contact between police and press. We are

:35:45. > :35:50.awaiting the conclusion of the Daniel Morgan panel which might test

:35:51. > :35:56.illustrate some of these issues. It is true in other things as well. You

:35:57. > :36:02.brought back the shoes break 74 and how the media where influenced in

:36:03. > :36:06.that instance. There are many examples looking back in time of

:36:07. > :36:11.death and part one of the Levenson inquiry found unhealthy links

:36:12. > :36:14.between senior Met officers and newspapers. That led to the

:36:15. > :36:21.resignation of the Met the lease chief and indeed others. The issue

:36:22. > :36:27.cannot be left there. There have also been public officials and the

:36:28. > :36:35.lease officers convicted of offences cause of these matters. -- police

:36:36. > :36:40.officers. He had to answer explicitly today. It cannot be a

:36:41. > :36:44.case now of wriggling out of a commitment. It is not a commitment

:36:45. > :36:48.you can wriggle out to given everything they have been through. A

:36:49. > :36:53.promise should be a promise to people who have suffered the way

:36:54. > :36:58.victims of press intrusion have suffered. I know the Hillsborough

:36:59. > :37:03.families feel exactly the same. They were victims of the biggest example

:37:04. > :37:08.of police briefing of newspapers and it wasn't just one newspaper. It

:37:09. > :37:14.will think it was just one newspaper that reported the lives but it was

:37:15. > :37:17.many. The lies were given to whites newsagency in Sheffield and those

:37:18. > :37:24.lies went around the world. This week I had the e-mail from someone

:37:25. > :37:27.in the United States that said when they saw a recent BBC Two

:37:28. > :37:32.Hillsborough documentary the red astonished to find the truth when

:37:33. > :37:38.they thought for 20 years it was an example of hooliganism. It is

:37:39. > :37:44.impossible to say the harm those lies caused. We need a better answer

:37:45. > :37:48.than the one we have got. If he were to stand up now that this bag box

:37:49. > :37:53.and say really to this House there will be a second stage inquiry into

:37:54. > :37:58.the culture of relations between the lease and dress I would be the first

:37:59. > :38:07.tonight to say we will not please amendment to a vote. -- police and

:38:08. > :38:11.press. I would say to campaigners for just as they are being slowly

:38:12. > :38:14.let down here and that is being slowly slid into the long grass and

:38:15. > :38:20.we have had anonymous briefings from people close to the culture

:38:21. > :38:24.secretary that it has been canned. We are not on their side of the

:38:25. > :38:28.House prepared to accept that I would say to the minister unless he

:38:29. > :38:34.can provide more directly issued and we will push this matter to a vote

:38:35. > :38:38.this evening or that we forced the Prime Minister to honour his own

:38:39. > :38:45.promise to the victims of breast intrusion and indeed hacking. On

:38:46. > :38:51.that specific point the Prime Minister said we should do it

:38:52. > :38:57.without further delay in March 13. The select committee be Secretary Of

:38:58. > :39:02.State said they were awaiting a further government statement.

:39:03. > :39:06.Wouldn't you think even though the use since the Prime Minister's

:39:07. > :39:12.promise is far too long for many people who have been victims of

:39:13. > :39:16.intrusion. I would say so. I can't see there is any doubt about this

:39:17. > :39:20.have on the clarity of the statements the Prime Minister has

:39:21. > :39:24.already given that I have read out. This was given not just to these

:39:25. > :39:30.victims but also to senior parliamentarians, how can this be a

:39:31. > :39:37.negotiate will commitment? I will give way again. I am grateful. The

:39:38. > :39:41.culture secretary was in the room as the chair of the culture select

:39:42. > :39:48.committee so he is very clear that a promise was made. Well, there you

:39:49. > :39:54.go. That probably says it all. I think he seems to be in a different

:39:55. > :39:58.mode these days but one wonders what deals have been done by the

:39:59. > :40:04.government if they are preparing to unpick this agreement and we will be

:40:05. > :40:10.watching very carefully. It is a fair point that there are ongoing

:40:11. > :40:13.investigations. I take that point there are still investigations which

:40:14. > :40:19.have a material impact on the issue we are investigating. It is not an

:40:20. > :40:23.issue of us say we want it and we wanted to start right now. There are

:40:24. > :40:27.matters to be concluded in the courts before the inquiry can

:40:28. > :40:32.proceed. What we are after is the removal of any doubt that it will

:40:33. > :40:36.proceed at the appropriate moment. That it will be honoured, that

:40:37. > :40:40.promised that the Prime Minister gave to those victims. That is what

:40:41. > :40:46.we are seeking to establish to night, but we are asking the House

:40:47. > :40:51.to lay down very clearly. I think it goes beyond party politics. Those

:40:52. > :40:55.families and victims have suffered enough and people on both sides of

:40:56. > :40:58.the House or it to them to make good on a promise that was given to them

:40:59. > :41:04.and that's why I look forward to members of both sides joining us in

:41:05. > :41:09.the lobby tonight. Thank you for giving way. These families have

:41:10. > :41:15.suffered enough. This House and this chamber has been united in that.

:41:16. > :41:20.With the Shadow Minister not agree with me that statements from the

:41:21. > :41:24.minister today, this second inquiry will go ahead to put an end to

:41:25. > :41:29.suffering from these families, they have suffered enough, let this be

:41:30. > :41:35.the end. My honourable friend would sit very well. This is it. This is

:41:36. > :41:39.what I have seen working with the Hillsborough families fighting for

:41:40. > :41:43.justice and others, too. It is not just the initial trauma that they

:41:44. > :41:48.suffer that affects them, it is how the system grinds them down

:41:49. > :41:52.afterwards, take them fight for everything, it doesn't give them an

:41:53. > :41:58.inch and slowly drains the life out of them. How cool is that? It is

:41:59. > :42:03.just wrong that the machine of government thinks it can operate in

:42:04. > :42:08.that way. I was speaking to a family today that I will go on to mention

:42:09. > :42:13.any minute, going to a meeting with 14 lawyers around the table and just

:42:14. > :42:17.a couple of family members. It is not right. Those of us who have been

:42:18. > :42:23.ministers have seen that style. It is time to change it. Don't make

:42:24. > :42:29.these families fight for everything. Get the skills in the favour away

:42:30. > :42:34.from the powerful, why not? I don't know what happened with other

:42:35. > :42:39.ministers, I have never sat in on these meetings but anyone who has a

:42:40. > :42:46.meeting with me as Minister now it is not the way I operate and never

:42:47. > :42:50.have. I have bought a lot of time for the Minister and he knows that

:42:51. > :42:55.however, if they are listening to this debate today, I see my

:42:56. > :42:58.honourable friend from Hull is not in but if the victims of

:42:59. > :43:02.contaminated blood was listening to this debate today I think the would

:43:03. > :43:09.immediately recognise what I am saying. Victims of organophosphate

:43:10. > :43:16.poisoning, sheep dip, they will understand what I am saying today.

:43:17. > :43:18.People waiting for the announcement on the battle of Orgreave

:43:19. > :43:26.investigation will understand what I am saying. There are people who have

:43:27. > :43:30.not an given justice by the system out there. It is just not right, it

:43:31. > :43:37.really is not right and that is why I keep say we must make Hillsborough

:43:38. > :43:39.a moment of change their wee tip the scales in favour of ordinary

:43:40. > :43:46.families and away from the establishment. I think the position

:43:47. > :43:52.of old site has been made perfectly clear, I would like to act as peace

:43:53. > :44:01.broker. Could there be an exception to act as Levenson. Could that not

:44:02. > :44:05.be given today? That would be good enough if we got a cast-iron

:44:06. > :44:09.commitment. We have reintroduced the doubt. There have been media

:44:10. > :44:14.briefings saying it will probably not go ahead now so they are the

:44:15. > :44:18.ones who have muddied the waters. If they were to clarify that tonight

:44:19. > :44:24.that would be good enough. If they were to say it will go ahead after

:44:25. > :44:27.the proper time has elapsed given the criminal proceedings that are

:44:28. > :44:31.still outstanding then fine, everyone would understand that. If

:44:32. > :44:35.they would give the commitment to night that they would be no need for

:44:36. > :44:40.a vote then fine we have done our job. If they cannot do that it is

:44:41. > :44:45.revealing in itself. If they cannot reaffirm that commitment to the

:44:46. > :44:49.people they have already given that commitment to that is revealing in

:44:50. > :44:52.itself and why we are right to bring evil in those circumstances so that

:44:53. > :44:59.those people are not being strung along in the hope that one day there

:45:00. > :45:05.will be a Levenson to. They are being held to account which is what

:45:06. > :45:10.we are doing tonight. They have the chance to do it and say they will

:45:11. > :45:14.honour what they said. If they don't members of decency and integrity on

:45:15. > :45:18.both sides of the House we want to stand with us and hold them to

:45:19. > :45:30.account for their own promise that they need. Finally, let me turn if I

:45:31. > :45:39.may to new clause... I have forgotten the number of it now! The

:45:40. > :45:46.clause on parity, what is the number of it, 63. That took a while! The

:45:47. > :45:50.point I would want to say introducing this clause which seeks

:45:51. > :45:53.to establish the principle of parity of legal funding for bereaved

:45:54. > :45:58.families at inquests involving the lease. The one thing I want to say

:45:59. > :46:01.at the beginning is it is very important people do not see

:46:02. > :46:08.Hillsborough as a one of that belongs to a forgotten either. To be

:46:09. > :46:13.honest many bereaved families still face a very similar experience to

:46:14. > :46:17.date when they go to an inquest. He often find they are pitched into an

:46:18. > :46:23.adversarial and aggressive courtroom still wrought with grief, unable to

:46:24. > :46:28.match the spending of the lease or public sector on their own legal

:46:29. > :46:32.representation and they find their lives get picked apart and they get

:46:33. > :46:36.made to look like they are indeed the perpetrators, not the victims.

:46:37. > :46:41.This is a very common experience and many of the people who suffer that

:46:42. > :46:42.experience do not have the backing, the huge support that the

:46:43. > :47:00.Hillsborough families have. That is like this principle is so

:47:01. > :47:07.tremendously important. His remarks will be heard by ritual guns, the

:47:08. > :47:13.daughter of Fillmore Mills, who was killed when he was in hospital while

:47:14. > :47:17.he was being restrained by the police, but I've had another

:47:18. > :47:22.constituent who has raised an issue in relation to his mother who was a

:47:23. > :47:29.victim of her children being abducted by their father, who spent

:47:30. > :47:33.nearly two decades without being able to contact her children. He is

:47:34. > :47:38.currently litigating against the police and feels a similar kind of

:47:39. > :47:44.bereavement while he has been kept away from his brothers and sisters

:47:45. > :47:50.while his mother has been kept from her children, and he hoped that this

:47:51. > :47:55.kind of approach could enable people like him who are taking cases

:47:56. > :48:01.against the police to be able to get access to some kind of resource.

:48:02. > :48:07.With that be possible? That is exactly the point that lies behind

:48:08. > :48:13.this amendment today, because she has just made my point that we will

:48:14. > :48:17.all have in our own experiences these examples where we know

:48:18. > :48:21.families that have been at inquests and it has been a highly

:48:22. > :48:32.unsatisfactory experience, where they did not get legal support. The

:48:33. > :48:37.public spectre spend taxpayer's money like water, hiring the best

:48:38. > :48:41.QCs and defend their reputations and their backs and the ordinary

:48:42. > :48:46.families are scrabbling around, remortgaging the House, doing

:48:47. > :48:51.whatever they can do to put up some kind of fight against that. How

:48:52. > :48:56.wrong is that? Public money should pay to establish the truth and that

:48:57. > :49:01.shows there should be parity between the two sides in that process. There

:49:02. > :49:04.should not be the case where you have the public sector packing the

:49:05. > :49:13.court room with these highly paid qui QCs and that is an important

:49:14. > :49:19.principle to establish and if there was to be one lasting legacy to

:49:20. > :49:24.Hillsborough, this should be it. I was tempted to make this point

:49:25. > :49:28.before by the right honourable gentleman for North Norfolk. If the

:49:29. > :49:36.Hillsborough families had been represented by Michael Mansfield,

:49:37. > :49:44.there is no chance that that cruel and inhumane 315 cut-off would have

:49:45. > :49:47.been allowed to stand. Have we ever had a situation where bereaved

:49:48. > :49:52.families are told you cannot have information about what happened to

:49:53. > :49:57.your loved ones in their dying minutes? Have we ever had a

:49:58. > :50:03.situation before after 27 years they were finally told who gave them the

:50:04. > :50:08.kiss of life, who carried them over the pitch? What an affront to

:50:09. > :50:14.justice is that but it was allowed to stand because they could not have

:50:15. > :50:19.somebody to challenge it. Margaret Aspinall, chair of the Hillsborough

:50:20. > :50:22.Family Support Group, came to Parliament to deliver a personal

:50:23. > :50:27.reflection of what it was like back in those days all those years ago

:50:28. > :50:32.and I am grateful to all members who attended and I'm sure they will

:50:33. > :50:36.agree it was an intensely moving occasion. Margaret described the

:50:37. > :50:46.indescribable pain when she was sent to check of just over ?1000 which

:50:47. > :50:52.was compensation for her son James. She had to put that with the legal

:50:53. > :50:57.fund. It wasn't enough because she had the cost of travelling to the

:50:58. > :51:01.inquest, to Sheffield every day. She was absolutely living on the bread

:51:02. > :51:07.line because she was having to borrow money from her family, her

:51:08. > :51:12.mother to make it all work. How can that be right for families in these

:51:13. > :51:16.circumstances when they have not done anything wrong, to find

:51:17. > :51:20.themselves in that situation? It cannot be right that they are

:51:21. > :51:27.scratching and saving and doing all those things when taxpayers's money

:51:28. > :51:31.is being paid to do them down the other side. He is right to highlight

:51:32. > :51:39.the inequality of arms between families and the state and he will

:51:40. > :51:47.note that he has campaigned tirelessly on this issue. An inquest

:51:48. > :51:51.may not happen for five or six years, in which time all sorts of

:51:52. > :51:55.untruths can flourish but it can only be recorded in the statistics

:51:56. > :52:02.as having taken a year. That is right. It is that delay that is

:52:03. > :52:09.often used to grind people down further. It does not work. I think

:52:10. > :52:14.we as a parliament have to decide we prepared to let people carry on

:52:15. > :52:19.going through this entirely unsatisfactory process? I don't we

:52:20. > :52:25.should. You can see in the experience of people today the

:52:26. > :52:32.parallels with the experience of the Hillsborough families. Let's give a

:52:33. > :52:49.recent example. There is a young boy who died in 2014 in the floods, in

:52:50. > :52:56.his home in Surrey. Where hydrogen cyanide was brought into the House

:52:57. > :53:01.from a former landfill site that was not properly sealed. The inquest

:53:02. > :53:05.starts today and it is a very high profile case. But the family has

:53:06. > :53:09.been turned down three times now for legal aid. This is an ordinary

:53:10. > :53:16.family that were going about their business and all of a sudden, their

:53:17. > :53:21.son is dead and the father is in a wheelchair. This inquest starts

:53:22. > :53:26.today and the only reason they have got quality legal representation is

:53:27. > :53:33.because there was an anonymous ?25,000 donation given to the family

:53:34. > :53:43.on Friday. I put it to the people across the House, that cannot

:53:44. > :53:46.possibly be right. The right honourable gentleman will also know

:53:47. > :53:50.that when being assessed for financial support, it is not just

:53:51. > :53:56.the image at family that has finances looked at, it is also the

:53:57. > :54:01.extended family as well. Extraordinarily unfair and I have to

:54:02. > :54:05.say, I think his government has made it an affair with the cops to legal

:54:06. > :54:11.aid because people are not just getting through now. They are not

:54:12. > :54:13.getting funding when they are applying. They are being

:54:14. > :54:23.unrepresented at these inquests and that cannot be right. I accept that

:54:24. > :54:27.cases like Hillsborough required a lot of input from lawyers but

:54:28. > :54:33.someone who has a knee jerk reaction that we should not be feeding

:54:34. > :54:40.lawyers, does he think it is a possibility in other cases that the

:54:41. > :54:44.chief coroner could lay down rules that the other side should be either

:54:45. > :54:52.given legal representation or the other side are told they are not

:54:53. > :54:56.needed? If he looks at the way we have constructed our amendment, it

:54:57. > :55:00.is designed to develop the same effect. It is designed to say there

:55:01. > :55:05.should be parity of legal funding and that is an incentive for the

:55:06. > :55:10.public sector not to spend too much, because if it has to fund the

:55:11. > :55:16.families as well, it may bring down the legal bill, it may not add

:55:17. > :55:26.further costs. Now we have the choice coroner and in the past, the

:55:27. > :55:34.coroner's Bill, some recognition of parity would be welcome but I've got

:55:35. > :55:42.to say, the knee jerk reaction these days is to get a lawyer involved. In

:55:43. > :55:46.some cases you may not need it. Do you know what we need? We need

:55:47. > :55:53.inquisitorial inquests rather than adversarial inquests because with

:55:54. > :55:56.the case of Hillsborough, the Lord Chief Justice made a very specific

:55:57. > :56:01.ruling when he quashed the original inquest and he said that the new

:56:02. > :56:06.inquest he hoped given the fact that police had clearly tainted the

:56:07. > :56:14.evidence, should not degenerate into an adversarial battle, but that is

:56:15. > :56:19.exactly what happened. At public expense, and individual particularly

:56:20. > :56:23.hired to represent the former officers, a Mr John Beggs went into

:56:24. > :56:29.that court room and repeated all kinds of lies at public expense and

:56:30. > :56:34.innuendo about the supporters of Liverpool football club. We

:56:35. > :56:39.witnessed it. It was a particularly unpleasant thing to witness but it

:56:40. > :56:44.is even more galling to know that we are paying for that and this brings

:56:45. > :56:52.me on to this final point. It is not just the cost of all of this, it is

:56:53. > :56:59.the way that the manner in which people are questioned that is also

:57:00. > :57:07.so gross and so unjust. Let me give a final example. After a long fight

:57:08. > :57:11.by her family, the House will note that an inquest was recently held

:57:12. > :57:16.into the death of Cheryl James who died at the geek at barracks in

:57:17. > :57:24.Surrey. The QC acting for the Surrey Police was the same Mr John Beggs. I

:57:25. > :57:29.know from speaking to Cheryl's family that they were deeply hurt by

:57:30. > :57:34.an intrusive and aggressive line of questioning that focused on a number

:57:35. > :57:38.of varied personal questions and they were particularly hurt by an

:57:39. > :57:46.untrue allegation that was levelled at them, that Mr James had made a

:57:47. > :57:52.number of enquiries to Surrey Police and as a result according to Mr

:57:53. > :57:56.Beggs had distracted the police from the mini Dowler investigation. That

:57:57. > :58:01.is what was said. Can you imagine how he felt when he heard that?

:58:02. > :58:08.Trying to just get to the truth as to what happened to his daughter and

:58:09. > :58:14.finding himself the subject of an outrageous, appalling slur like that

:58:15. > :58:19.which in fact the Dowler family, such is their decency, stepped in to

:58:20. > :58:23.correct. It should not be like this. It really must not be like this. We

:58:24. > :58:29.have a situation where any police force in the land, they have

:58:30. > :58:33.instruction to hired this individual if they feel they are in a tight

:58:34. > :58:39.spot. They pay great amounts of public money to do this. It should

:58:40. > :58:45.not be allowed to carry on, it should be called time on today. I

:58:46. > :58:51.think that type of adversarial inquest is wrong but is it not

:58:52. > :59:01.something again, the chief coroner could lay down in guidance to

:59:02. > :59:05.coroners to stop that behaviour. It does not help to get to the truth

:59:06. > :59:13.and I think my honourable friend is making a good point. I cannot see

:59:14. > :59:23.why the Government would not accept a bill proposed by Lord will that

:59:24. > :59:28.would create an office at national level of an individual support

:59:29. > :59:32.bereaved families so that each family does not have to reinvent the

:59:33. > :59:38.wheel and go through all be learning to get ready for an inquest. That is

:59:39. > :59:44.another good proposal. I will finish on this point. There is a very

:59:45. > :59:49.simple principle that we are seeking to establish here and in the words

:59:50. > :59:55.of Mr James, it is about parity of arms. If there is going to be an

:59:56. > :00:00.adversarial battle in the courtroom, at least give bereaved families the

:00:01. > :00:05.same ability to defend themselves as the public sector have. I feel this

:00:06. > :00:10.is an unanswerable principle and I am sorry the Government has decided

:00:11. > :00:14.it cannot support this tonight. I note they are waiting for the

:00:15. > :00:20.conclusion of this chip James's report but this is than

:00:21. > :00:24.Hillsborough. This is much bigger than Hillsborough. This goes through

:00:25. > :00:29.a whole number of families who are facing injustice of a similar kind

:00:30. > :00:34.today. It has got to be the case, has it not, that public money should

:00:35. > :00:38.fund the establishment of the truth and particularly help people get to

:00:39. > :00:44.the truth at the first time of asking. Why? Because that should be

:00:45. > :00:49.used by public bodies to learn, to look at where they went wrong, to

:00:50. > :00:54.see where they went wrong. Instead they go into these courtrooms to

:00:55. > :00:59.defend themselves, reputations and spend large amounts of taxpayers's

:01:00. > :01:03.money. I would hope the Government would agree with the spirit with

:01:04. > :01:07.what I am saying tonight. If they do agree with the spirit, I would hope

:01:08. > :01:12.they would give a clear commitment this evening that they support the

:01:13. > :01:16.aim of parity funding for families at inquest and from there, hopefully

:01:17. > :01:22.we might be able to move forward but from what I gather, they have not

:01:23. > :01:26.done enough from my point of view and I am afraid to say to the

:01:27. > :01:31.Minister, unless he is able to provide that level of reassurance,

:01:32. > :01:35.we will press this amendment to a vote tonight because we are

:01:36. > :01:40.determined to make health for a moment of real change in this

:01:41. > :01:45.country. It must be a watershed when power shifts towards the hands of

:01:46. > :01:52.ordinary people and away from those in positions of power.

:01:53. > :01:58.That is what people are expecting this Parliament to do. We cannot

:01:59. > :02:05.face a 27 year injustice and then feel we do not have two act, we can

:02:06. > :02:08.carry on as we wear, we cannot. Ordinary people are facing in

:02:09. > :02:13.justice today and I been ground down as the battle to get the truth and

:02:14. > :02:18.justice. Let's do the right thing tonight Madame deputies eager, I

:02:19. > :02:21.call on all sides of the House to support the package we are putting

:02:22. > :02:26.forward tonight and in doing so let's finally make this country a

:02:27. > :02:33.fairer country where power is more evenly shared among people from all

:02:34. > :02:36.backgrounds. We have about 90 minutes before wind-up starts and I

:02:37. > :02:45.think we have eight members wishing to speak in this debate. I don't

:02:46. > :02:50.criticise the shadow Secretary for one moment for speaking for 45

:02:51. > :02:53.minutes, he had a lot to say. He knows a lot about the believed

:02:54. > :02:58.families of Hillsborough and all that goes with that so I don't want

:02:59. > :03:05.to criticise him for that what I would do if I may generally before I

:03:06. > :03:13.come on to talk about new clause 23, is perhaps, and I don't know the

:03:14. > :03:18.sill that he referred to but I've never met him, he referred to him

:03:19. > :03:23.twice and accused him of unattractive conduct, speaking on

:03:24. > :03:27.instructions he did not go in there I would assume in line with the

:03:28. > :03:34.tradition and professional standards of the bark laboratory to attack

:03:35. > :03:37.people. He was acting for the two public authorities on the two

:03:38. > :03:42.separate occasions and it was his duty to put those clients' case. It

:03:43. > :03:47.may have been an unattractive case and we come across as deeply

:03:48. > :03:51.upsetting to the people he was cross-examining but it was his

:03:52. > :03:55.recessional duty to do that. It might be that another man might have

:03:56. > :03:58.done it differently or another client might have given different

:03:59. > :04:05.instructions but I think it is a bit mean to call out a particular artist

:04:06. > :04:09.here in the House of Commons. I don't want to be distracted because

:04:10. > :04:15.we have a very short space of time. I just want to defend the method I

:04:16. > :04:21.which the profession as to represent his clients. That aside, I don't

:04:22. > :04:26.have much to criticise the Shadow Home Secretary for. What I do want

:04:27. > :04:31.to do is quickly in the short space of time available dock about new

:04:32. > :04:39.clause 23 which is a new clause which will require the removal of

:04:40. > :04:49.the requirement for prior authorisation exempting in the

:04:50. > :04:57.existing section 60 eight 80 in the -60 double A. They remove items

:04:58. > :05:04.where they are used for the purpose of concealed identities. The context

:05:05. > :05:09.in which I and about 22 other honourable members of this House

:05:10. > :05:14.have tabled this new clause goes back to the criminal Justice and

:05:15. > :05:23.Public order act of the NT 94 where under section 60 of that act

:05:24. > :05:30.Parliament gave the police the power we are an officer at the rank of

:05:31. > :05:35.inspector or more senior reasonably leaved that incidents involving

:05:36. > :05:39.serious violence may take place in any locality in his police area as

:05:40. > :05:47.an expedient to give authorisation to prevent. Or that people are

:05:48. > :05:50.carrying offensive weapons in the locality without good reason, that

:05:51. > :06:00.in Europe police officer might give an authorisation that items can be

:06:01. > :06:07.exercised in that locality foray specially specified amount of time

:06:08. > :06:13.not more than 24 hours. Geographically limited and

:06:14. > :06:24.time-limited for the police to do certain things. That was extended in

:06:25. > :06:30.2001 by the addition of section 60AA which gave the lease in that

:06:31. > :06:35.geographical for that limited time to require the removal of disguises

:06:36. > :06:38.and so, provided there was prior authorisation and that authorisation

:06:39. > :06:44.was written and it was for 24 hours or ethics tended by another officer

:06:45. > :06:51.for another 24 hours, within that limited location the constable in

:06:52. > :06:56.uniform was enabled to require any person to remove an item which he

:06:57. > :07:05.believes is being worn wholly or mainly for the purpose of concealing

:07:06. > :07:13.his identity. So, it wasn't until 2001 that the 94 act was amended to

:07:14. > :07:21.allow the police in certain limited circumstances to be authorised to

:07:22. > :07:28.deal with disguises. In 2011 you will remember that the where

:07:29. > :07:33.widespread riots throughout the country in August of that year and

:07:34. > :07:41.following those riots the government issued a consultation paper to

:07:42. > :07:47.consider whether the things needed to be looked at. Firstly it dealt

:07:48. > :07:52.with the use of the word insulting in the public order act. Actually it

:07:53. > :07:56.looked that new powers to request the removal of face coverings and

:07:57. > :08:00.thirdly Edward that new powers to impose curfews. The reason why the

:08:01. > :08:10.government thought it appropriate to consult in relation to new powers

:08:11. > :08:17.over disguises and so forth is that, and it says here in the document,

:08:18. > :08:23.the consultation aims to progress the commitment made by the Prime

:08:24. > :08:28.Minister with request to the removal of face coverings. The government

:08:29. > :08:33.announced that the police would be given extended powers to demand the

:08:34. > :08:38.removal of face coverings and any circumstances where there was

:08:39. > :08:42.reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. Interestingly, the

:08:43. > :08:46.government didn't respond to this consultation other than with

:08:47. > :08:52.relation to insulting words and behaviour and the law was amended in

:08:53. > :09:01.that regard. However, as regards the power to reply to removal of face

:09:02. > :09:06.coverings it was dated back to 2001. As I said, this power is

:09:07. > :09:12.geographically limited, time-limited and requires prior authorisation.

:09:13. > :09:16.I've had the benefit of two meetings now with my right honourable friend

:09:17. > :09:20.the Minister and he very generously allowed me and two of my honourable

:09:21. > :09:26.friends to try to persuade him that the law needed to be changed. On

:09:27. > :09:31.this occasion there were only eight officials in the room but he was

:09:32. > :09:38.unpersuaded it seems to me on the advice he had been given by official

:09:39. > :09:42.police officers that a change in the law was necessary. Indeed it was

:09:43. > :09:48.suggested to me that our new clause could weaken the police powers to

:09:49. > :09:52.remove disguises. The thing we need to realise is that the people who

:09:53. > :10:01.attend demonstrations waiting Alec Lavers, winning face coverings, are

:10:02. > :10:07.not doing it simply to avoid their identities being discovered. Clearly

:10:08. > :10:12.if you go to a demonstration at which a lawful activity is going on

:10:13. > :10:15.and the police are able to film it and whether it is local authority

:10:16. > :10:19.CCTV cameras covering it, the is no better way of avoiding detection or

:10:20. > :10:25.avoiding being caught than by disguising your face cause,

:10:26. > :10:31.essentially, in most criminal cases, not all, but most criminal cases,

:10:32. > :10:34.the identity of the perpetrator is a fairly central part of the

:10:35. > :10:40.prosecutor 's case. I am reasonably sure that in the days when people

:10:41. > :10:45.used to run into banks with shotguns and hold it up normally waving a

:10:46. > :10:49.stocking over the face, they were not wearing silk stockings on the

:10:50. > :10:54.ahead because they liked the feel of silk on their face, they were

:10:55. > :10:58.weaving these sill stockings or even tights and therefore nylon over at

:10:59. > :11:03.the faces, in order to prevent their being discovered. The same thing, I

:11:04. > :11:09.suspect, goes for people who are intent upon pretty unattractive

:11:10. > :11:14.behaviour in the streets here in London, in Manchester at the last

:11:15. > :11:19.Conservative Party conference with people in masks at at delegates

:11:20. > :11:24.going into the conference hall. They also do it to intimidate. There is

:11:25. > :11:30.nothing more intimidating than seeing somebody covered like that

:11:31. > :11:37.coming at you or demonstrating with a view to causing trouble. Yes, of

:11:38. > :11:42.course, the outlawed already on the statute book which make it possible

:11:43. > :11:47.for a police officer to go in and arrest somebody waving a facemask if

:11:48. > :11:51.he is committing an offence that in the event that this is a large-scale

:11:52. > :11:56.demonstration, in the event there are not enough police officers to

:11:57. > :12:00.make it safe or practical for that police officer to go in and

:12:01. > :12:05.therefore police need to lie on video evidence or film evidence of

:12:06. > :12:12.the perpetrator, it strikes me as unreal for a police officer to rely

:12:13. > :12:18.on the existing power of limited geographical nature, a limited time

:12:19. > :12:24.structure, in order to get in and deal with the matter. Is he getting

:12:25. > :12:29.restless? I am conscious I may not have time but he indicated earlier I

:12:30. > :12:36.was not persuaded. I did listen very much to the lease officers but I

:12:37. > :12:42.also want to indicate no the is a stop and search review coming up

:12:43. > :12:47.later this year and we would insert face coverings into that review so

:12:48. > :12:51.we have a better understanding. I think that is a significant

:12:52. > :12:55.concession. That is a change in attitude and I am grateful but I am

:12:56. > :13:01.not sure reviews is what we need. My understanding is that the police do

:13:02. > :13:07.not want this change because they think the powers they have are

:13:08. > :13:12.adequate for what they need to do but it isn't because these events

:13:13. > :13:14.are happening. People are being terrified, people are being

:13:15. > :13:20.inhibited from going about their lawful is this in the countryside

:13:21. > :13:26.and in urban areas and it is not good enough for us to rely for a

:13:27. > :13:32.change in the lease code or a change following some review. The

:13:33. > :13:37.government did not reply to its own consultation in 2011. I need to

:13:38. > :13:41.press the government to get this matter properly ventilated. One of

:13:42. > :13:45.the jobs I have in Parliament is to express the concerns of the public

:13:46. > :13:50.from my own constituency and other parts of the public who are

:13:51. > :13:57.dissatisfied about the level of police activity in policing this

:13:58. > :14:03.sort of behaviour. A review is nothing to do with what the police

:14:04. > :14:09.actually want. When we did a review of stop and search because it would

:14:10. > :14:14.be inappropriate that is why there was a review. If we thought it was

:14:15. > :14:22.being used anyway my constituents would not expect them peace will be

:14:23. > :14:26.changed. Reviews do not come up very often, this is a golden opportunity.

:14:27. > :14:29.I will look forward to seeing the terms of the review that my right

:14:30. > :14:34.honourable friend has look forward and I trust him when he says it is

:14:35. > :14:40.going to be useful but right out constituents in rural and in urban

:14:41. > :14:47.areas are very distressed at the way in which face masks are used to

:14:48. > :14:51.terrify and to hide criminal activity rather the identities of

:14:52. > :14:56.criminals. The sooner we get this matter debated and debated with

:14:57. > :15:02.reasonable time to contribute to the discussions on the floor of this

:15:03. > :15:06.House or in the other place... I am grateful to my right honourable

:15:07. > :15:10.friend. As he knows I1 of the co-signatories on his amendment. The

:15:11. > :15:14.problem with the situation at the moment is the constable on duty they

:15:15. > :15:19.require a face covering to be removed but he does then require

:15:20. > :15:23.post-authorisation from a senior officer on duty and I think in both

:15:24. > :15:27.the lack will case and in my own place in the badger cull where

:15:28. > :15:31.somebody was art any car late at night for several nights with masks

:15:32. > :15:35.on to deliberately intimidate residents in the nearest farmhouse I

:15:36. > :15:40.am not sure whether the constables on duty knew whether they would get

:15:41. > :15:45.that prior or post-authorisation and this was will make it crystal clear

:15:46. > :15:52.if it is passed into this ill. I am grateful for the support. I hope

:15:53. > :15:55.this new clause will make it easier for them to do what they have to do

:15:56. > :16:00.which is arrest frightening people who are intent on doing criminal

:16:01. > :16:08.things. The problem, it seems to me, and it is clear on the face of

:16:09. > :16:12.section 60 and 60AA which is a problem which was removed by our new

:16:13. > :16:17.clause if the need prior authorisation. It may be that has a

:16:18. > :16:21.matter of practice that is ignored and if it is ignored it would

:16:22. > :16:25.suggest to media art leaving on lawfully when they give themselves

:16:26. > :16:30.host of forestry and write it down in a notebook.

:16:31. > :16:39.That isn't, it seems to me, what the current legislation requires. We

:16:40. > :16:43.need to bring this to a close now and also to ensure that the police

:16:44. > :16:47.are given the powers that the public believe they should have, in order

:16:48. > :16:58.to prevent this disgusting behaviour from continuing. I writes for the

:16:59. > :17:02.SNP principally to place on record our unending admiration for the

:17:03. > :17:06.honourable member for Lee and other members on both sides of the chamber

:17:07. > :17:11.who have fought this righteous fight for so many years, for so many

:17:12. > :17:15.people who have been lied to and have been subject to the most

:17:16. > :17:20.horrendous cover up. I echo pretty much all of the roads -- words that

:17:21. > :17:24.he said at the dispatch box earlier. Football is very important for

:17:25. > :17:27.people in Scotland, as the Right Honourable member will understand.

:17:28. > :17:36.We send more people to football games per head of population than

:17:37. > :17:39.anywhere else in the UK than everyone can understand the fear of

:17:40. > :17:45.setting a loved one store football game and I'm not returning. Things

:17:46. > :17:47.like the Ibrox disaster are scarred into Scottish consciousness and we

:17:48. > :17:51.are committed to helping the honourable member for Lee to try get

:17:52. > :17:56.justice to all those people. The police system in Scotland is a

:17:57. > :18:00.devolved area and we are not perhaps able to offer any support other than

:18:01. > :18:06.in principle this evening, but I would just like to place that on

:18:07. > :18:14.record and wish him, his colleagues all the best for their fight for

:18:15. > :18:21.justice. Thank you for calling me to speak in this debate. I would like

:18:22. > :18:26.to speak to new clause 20 29, 32 and 43, all tabled in my name. I will

:18:27. > :18:28.try to be brief. Can I thank the honourable lady, my honourable

:18:29. > :18:32.friend for Staffordshire Moorlands for all the time she has taken in

:18:33. > :18:35.the past few weeks to discuss my concerns with me and I would like to

:18:36. > :18:37.thank my right honourable friend for Hemel Hempstead who has made himself

:18:38. > :18:54.available to me and I would also like to thank the Home Secretary. As

:18:55. > :18:56.you will know there is significant concern around the interaction

:18:57. > :18:59.between policing and mental health services and it is these issues that

:19:00. > :19:03.I wish to turn my attention to. New clause 26 places an obligation for

:19:04. > :19:09.chief constables to ensure that their police officers are properly

:19:10. > :19:15.trained in diversity and in equality in relation to mental health issues

:19:16. > :19:20.and specifically the issues that relate to ethnic minorities. I have

:19:21. > :19:25.worked very closely over the past five years with black mental health

:19:26. > :19:28.UK and they have raised these concerns directly with the Home

:19:29. > :19:34.Office and members for a number of years and I would like to read this

:19:35. > :19:39.paragraph out from their briefing. The joint Home Office and Department

:19:40. > :19:44.of Health revenue section 13513 sex of the Mental Health Act 1993

:19:45. > :19:48.acknowledged that in particular black African Caribbean men are

:19:49. > :19:53.disproportionately overrepresented in section 136 detentions, compared

:19:54. > :19:56.to the general population, and that black African Caribbean men in

:19:57. > :20:01.particular reported the use of force was more likely to be used against

:20:02. > :20:05.them by the police. These are legitimate and real concerns and

:20:06. > :20:11.they have been subject to academic research and they need to be

:20:12. > :20:16.addressed. I would say that nearly three years ago the Home Secretary

:20:17. > :20:20.hosted a fantastic conference at the QE2 Centre, co-hosted with black

:20:21. > :20:23.mental health UK and my right honourable friend from Hemel

:20:24. > :20:28.Hempstead spoke there and great strides are being made but we need

:20:29. > :20:36.to make sure further progress happens in the months and years

:20:37. > :20:40.ahead. New clause 26 requires the chief police officer to notify ad

:20:41. > :20:46.make an annual report to the Home Secretary as to what progress has

:20:47. > :20:49.been made in relation to diversity and equality training. I am not

:20:50. > :20:53.going to push this to the vote tonight but I have had assurances

:20:54. > :20:56.from ministers that this will be looked at seriously and my

:20:57. > :21:03.honourable friend is wishing to catch my attention. Thank you. This

:21:04. > :21:10.goes to the heart of the concept of policing by consent. I don't think

:21:11. > :21:14.anybody who has had policing -- involvement in policing will be

:21:15. > :21:18.unaware of the friction that exists between policing in many members of

:21:19. > :21:24.the UK black communities. Does he agree with me that an explicit step

:21:25. > :21:28.in this direction would go a long way to build bridges between UK

:21:29. > :21:34.policing and a very significant minority group in the UK. I agree

:21:35. > :21:39.with my right honourable friend and that is why I am delighted that my

:21:40. > :21:43.concerns have received such close attention from the government and

:21:44. > :21:47.the Treasury front bench and will continue to receive attention. I am

:21:48. > :21:52.looking forward to further updates in relation to this matter. The

:21:53. > :21:56.government is working very closely with black mental health UK and its

:21:57. > :21:59.principal and I hope those conversations continue. I did say I

:22:00. > :22:05.would try and be five minutes and I did stray a little bit over that but

:22:06. > :22:09.I do want to make progress. New clause 29 relates to access to legal

:22:10. > :22:15.advice before someone is detained under the Mental Health Act 19 83. I

:22:16. > :22:21.know that the opposition has tabled a new clause 24 which relates to

:22:22. > :22:26.advocacy. 29 is a probing amendment but the removal of someone's liberty

:22:27. > :22:31.should never happen lightly and again there is a great concern

:22:32. > :22:35.amongst the African Caribbean community and black mental health

:22:36. > :22:42.that if you are a black male, and a young, black male in particular you

:22:43. > :22:46.are more likely to have your liberty removed. This is a genuine request

:22:47. > :22:50.but I am not sure if it is delivering -- deliverable because

:22:51. > :22:53.often in section a new operating in a highly stressed situation on the

:22:54. > :22:56.needs of the individual who is ill at the time should be central to

:22:57. > :23:01.that sectioning but it does give voice to a very real concern and I

:23:02. > :23:05.am interested in the opposition's new clause 24 in relation to

:23:06. > :23:12.advocacy. Advocacy is often talked about but it is not delivered in the

:23:13. > :23:15.way it should be and this is an issue that might front bench is

:23:16. > :23:21.aware. I want to turn to new clause 42 and 43 which relate to the

:23:22. > :23:25.deployment of police officers on the wards and the use of Taser is. I am

:23:26. > :23:29.well aware that the right honourable gentleman for North Norfolk will be

:23:30. > :23:37.speaking to new clause 40, which is connected to this. I cannot be

:23:38. > :23:41.absolutist in my approach to this. I know black mental health never wants

:23:42. > :23:44.to see police officers used on mental health wards and I would

:23:45. > :23:50.share that view but I think there will always be occasions where that

:23:51. > :23:54.possibility will remain, but when the police officers are detained --

:23:55. > :24:02.deployed to mental health wards I really do believe there should be an

:24:03. > :24:03.almost immediate notification to the Police and Crime Commissioners and

:24:04. > :24:07.the Independent Police Complaints Commission that the deployment has

:24:08. > :24:10.taken place and I know that Home Office ministers are working very

:24:11. > :24:14.closely with Department of Health, collating battered statistics about

:24:15. > :24:19.the use of force and restraint, but we cannot wait 365 days before

:24:20. > :24:23.receiving this information. This information, when police are

:24:24. > :24:29.deployed on mental health wards, needs to be made available

:24:30. > :24:33.immediately. Immediately. Again, I have received assurances from the

:24:34. > :24:38.front that work will be done on this and I know that time is short but I

:24:39. > :24:44.hope in summing up today the front bench will be able to reassure

:24:45. > :24:48.myself and black mental health that work is being done on this. Finally

:24:49. > :24:53.it is the use of Taser is on mental health wards. My right honourable

:24:54. > :24:57.friend is with great justification and passion going to argue that

:24:58. > :25:02.Taser 's should never be used on mental health wards and my heart is

:25:03. > :25:07.with him on those arguments but my head says there may be some highly

:25:08. > :25:11.charged situations where a Tasered does need to be used but right now

:25:12. > :25:17.we know they are being used but we are not collating or collecting the

:25:18. > :25:22.information and there is no way for the house to find out what is going

:25:23. > :25:26.on. Where are Taser is used, and I hope it is never used, but in the

:25:27. > :25:32.event where it is used then the report has to be made within one

:25:33. > :25:33.week to the Police and Crime Commissioner and the Independent

:25:34. > :25:37.Police Complaints Commission. I am not suggesting for a minute that any

:25:38. > :25:42.police officer will follow this course of action lightly but we must

:25:43. > :25:48.remember that we are talking about safe hospital environments where a

:25:49. > :25:50.Taser and forces being used. I have received assurances from the

:25:51. > :25:56.government front bench in relation to this and I hope they can refer to

:25:57. > :26:01.those assurances in the wind-up. I am sorry I have gone on for a little

:26:02. > :26:06.longer than I said I would. I would finally draw the front bench

:26:07. > :26:11.attention to a trial in Los Angeles where Taser 's are linked to body

:26:12. > :26:16.cameras by Bluetooth so immediately a Taser is drawn, the camera starts

:26:17. > :26:19.recording and it does not need to be manually started by the police

:26:20. > :26:22.officer and as soon as the Taser is drawn the recording starts and that

:26:23. > :26:26.could be something the Home Office would like to look at. I apologise

:26:27. > :26:32.for speaking longer than I said I would. It is a pleasure to follow

:26:33. > :26:35.the honourable member for Broxbourne who has raised so many important

:26:36. > :26:40.issues that actually the time that the needs and this house leads to

:26:41. > :26:47.discuss all of these issues is not sufficient in a debate of this kind.

:26:48. > :26:49.I want to concentrate on just two aspects of the amendments. Two

:26:50. > :26:57.amendments that have been put as part of the list stage of the bill,

:26:58. > :27:04.and combine my remarks to those two. The first relates to the decision by

:27:05. > :27:09.the government to accept the representations of the home affairs

:27:10. > :27:13.committee to place an initial 28 day limit on precharge bail. I am sorry

:27:14. > :27:16.that the Minister has left the chamber because I wanted to pay

:27:17. > :27:19.tribute to him for the fact that he is one of the very few ministers

:27:20. > :27:23.that we have encountered who actually writes back to the select

:27:24. > :27:28.committee and says that the government is going to adopt some of

:27:29. > :27:34.the recommendations that we have made. He did so in respect of 28

:27:35. > :27:38.day, a 28 day limit on precharge bail and we have raised this on a

:27:39. > :27:41.number of issues and a number of cases, the most recently being our

:27:42. > :27:47.report on police bail which considered the case of Mr Paul

:27:48. > :27:51.Gambaccini, and the need for there to be some kind of end to the

:27:52. > :27:55.extension of police bail, which just goes on and on without there being

:27:56. > :28:03.any limits. This is very welcome and I think very important. The next new

:28:04. > :28:08.clause I want to concentrate on is new clause 22, which is the

:28:09. > :28:11.surrender of travel documentation. My honourable friend, the member for

:28:12. > :28:15.Birmingham Erdington, I don't know if you will be speaking to this new

:28:16. > :28:21.clause when it comes to wind-up, but I support it very strongly and it

:28:22. > :28:28.goes a long way to putting into law our concerns about terrorist

:28:29. > :28:32.suspects who are able to leave the country without giving up their

:28:33. > :28:37.passports, or even being asked for their passports. The committee in

:28:38. > :28:46.our evidence sessions concerning the review that we are doing into

:28:47. > :28:50.counterterrorism, the counter narrative, took interesting evidence

:28:51. > :28:54.from the sister of a man who fled the United Kingdom while he was on

:28:55. > :28:59.police bail and despite being asked politely by the police to send in

:29:00. > :29:05.his passport, by the time he had received that letter, well, he never

:29:06. > :29:11.received that letter because he had left the country, after being

:29:12. > :29:16.released from the country -- police bail, so he never got the polite

:29:17. > :29:19.letter because he was already in Syria by then. What the government

:29:20. > :29:24.is proposing in the legislation is very welcome but new clause 22 goes

:29:25. > :29:30.a little bit further and I hope very much that we will get the government

:29:31. > :29:33.to change its mind and access to the wording of new clause 22, because it

:29:34. > :29:41.is very much in keeping with the evidence given to us by the head of

:29:42. > :29:47.counterterrorism, when he said that when someone surrenders a passport

:29:48. > :29:50.immediately then they are able to, at least the police and security

:29:51. > :29:55.services know where that passport is, and if they breach that

:29:56. > :29:59.requirement, in other words if they don't hand over their passport, of

:30:00. > :30:06.course they would be in breach of bail. The Prime Minister...

:30:07. > :30:08.Certainly. I thank the right honourable gentleman and I

:30:09. > :30:12.understand that in my absence he said something nice about me so it

:30:13. > :30:16.is probably a good idea that I wasn't here. Is he aware that the

:30:17. > :30:21.police have the powers now, when granting police bail, to go with the

:30:22. > :30:28.individual and physically take the passport or travel document before

:30:29. > :30:31.they actually release them? They do indeed, but in this particular case

:30:32. > :30:34.they did not do it and it is a problem. We don't know how many

:30:35. > :30:40.cases because this is the one we know about. It came into the public

:30:41. > :30:45.domain and he ended up on a video on YouTube, telling us what he was

:30:46. > :30:49.doing. There could be other cases but people are not very open about

:30:50. > :30:54.admitting mistakes so it may have happened before and I except that

:30:55. > :30:58.and I think enshrining it in legislation, as is proposed by new

:30:59. > :31:05.clause 22 is very helpful. My second point out my final point relates to

:31:06. > :31:09.new clause 64, moved by the Shadow Home Secretary, the important of

:31:10. > :31:14.Leveson Report two. I was chair of the select committee who met with

:31:15. > :31:20.the Prime Minister along with the then chair of the culture committee

:31:21. > :31:26.and the secretary of state now, Lord Alan Beith, when he chaired the

:31:27. > :31:29.Justice committee. The three chairs of those committees were called to

:31:30. > :31:33.see the Prime Minister when he was about to announce the establishment

:31:34. > :31:37.of the first leather sling where it. We accepted his arguments because he

:31:38. > :31:40.made very good arguments because actually we should have two

:31:41. > :31:43.enquiries as of one and he made a promise we would have a second

:31:44. > :31:49.enquiry once the first one had been completed. Before the first leather

:31:50. > :31:56.sling enquiry started I went to see Lord Justice Leveson and he said he

:31:57. > :32:03.did not think he would be around in the position he was in to have a

:32:04. > :32:05.second enquiry. He is now doing other things and it will take a

:32:06. > :32:08.number of years but I accept what the Home Secretary said to the

:32:09. > :32:11.committee on the 16th of December when she gave evidence to us and she

:32:12. > :32:15.said there were two cases outstanding and until those two

:32:16. > :32:20.cases are outstanding than she did not think they could start a macro

:32:21. > :32:23.32-macro. We have now found their ears, I don't know if it is those

:32:24. > :32:26.two cases embedded with the Minister can tell us the number, but there

:32:27. > :32:31.are still outstanding matters that need to be considered.

:32:32. > :32:42.There is no reason why we should not have a second Leveson Inquiry. We

:32:43. > :32:47.can't start that process, appointing a chair of the committee, getting

:32:48. > :32:51.the mechanics together, perhaps having a panel as he did with the

:32:52. > :32:55.first inquiry, but we get that whole recess started and then when the

:32:56. > :33:00.legal proceedings have been concluded, the Home Secretary can

:33:01. > :33:03.come to the chamber, or the Prime Minister, and say they are

:33:04. > :33:07.concluded, we will now start the second inquiry. Why wait for that

:33:08. > :33:12.old to be concluded first before starting that process? I think that

:33:13. > :33:17.will give comfort not just to those who fought so hard in the

:33:18. > :33:22.Hillsborough case but also to other people, members of the public, some

:33:23. > :33:26.of whom have had helicopters flying over their houses when they happen

:33:27. > :33:35.to be abroad because of the relationship between the police and

:33:36. > :33:40.the press. We only get to know about the high-profile cases. There is a

:33:41. > :33:46.very good reason why we should have this second inquiry. I hope very

:33:47. > :33:52.much that will be done. The honourable member for Dumfries

:33:53. > :33:58.Galloway offered to be the honest broker between the Government and

:33:59. > :34:02.opposition. He came up with a form of words which the Shadow Home

:34:03. > :34:06.Secretary was prepared to accept. I don't know whether there will be

:34:07. > :34:10.discussions behind your chair, Madam Deputy Speaker, but there is the

:34:11. > :34:18.opportunity to avert the need for a vote. The Government only needs to

:34:19. > :34:24.say we will have it but not yet. Therefore we can proceed to go onto

:34:25. > :34:30.report stage and third reading without the fighting -- dividing the

:34:31. > :34:34.House on the important changes to policing which the Government is

:34:35. > :34:40.proposing. A lot of which we accept, I accept of being -- as being part

:34:41. > :34:47.and parcel of the way we modernise our police force. It is perhaps

:34:48. > :34:51.appropriate to follow the chair of the Home Affairs Committee because I

:34:52. > :34:53.am conscious that my predecessor as chair of the justice Select

:34:54. > :34:59.Committee was present when those assurances were given. I don't doubt

:35:00. > :35:03.the good intentions of the right honourable Minister on the bench and

:35:04. > :35:08.I'm prepared to cut the Government 's lack. But there is an important

:35:09. > :35:14.point, which is this. It is not purely the high-profile cases which

:35:15. > :35:23.are of concern of many professionals in the justice system. He spoke

:35:24. > :35:29.about the impact of Hillsborough and scandals of that kind but equally of

:35:30. > :35:33.concerns to lawyers, like myself for 25 years, is the long-term

:35:34. > :35:38.day-to-day causing us of relationships which develop, I'm

:35:39. > :35:44.sorry to say, between police officers, not necessarily the

:35:45. > :35:49.highest level, and reporters. There is a risk unless something is done

:35:50. > :35:53.to deal with that, there can be concerns about potential

:35:54. > :35:58.miscarriages of justice. It is not purely something coming on the back

:35:59. > :36:02.of the headline catching. There is a more insidious culture which can

:36:03. > :36:06.only be dealt with by very firm management by the leadership of the

:36:07. > :36:11.police service. If that is not lacking, and it needs to be looked

:36:12. > :36:23.at in the appropriate format, there is no doubt any practitioner at the

:36:24. > :36:26.bar will now that surprisingly the local press have been aware that a

:36:27. > :36:31.particular person was going to be arrested and a particular search was

:36:32. > :36:37.going to be carried out. I'm afraid that cannot happen accidentally. I

:36:38. > :36:42.think there is an issue of general concern. I will turn to new clause

:36:43. > :36:47.23 which I have been a signatory to. I accept that the minister wants to

:36:48. > :36:54.take this forward but I must say I agree with the sentiments expressed

:36:55. > :37:02.by my right honourable friend the member for Harborough and what I

:37:03. > :37:07.would briefly add to it is this. It is certainly true that there is

:37:08. > :37:13.inevitably a reluctance by officials, I used to find that as a

:37:14. > :37:17.minister, and by senior officers to complicate regulations if they think

:37:18. > :37:25.what they have got will do. I don't think the advice the Minister has

:37:26. > :37:29.been given in good faith, but I speak to officers on the front line

:37:30. > :37:34.in my constituency and there are concerns about the inadequacy of

:37:35. > :37:41.current provisions are genuine and perhaps their experience does not

:37:42. > :37:46.mirror the advice of a minister may be getting from some of the top

:37:47. > :37:57.brass of the service. Or the concerns my constituents who go to

:37:58. > :38:04.London and are sometimes caught in these situations, report. Can I turn

:38:05. > :38:08.to the main issue I wanted to raise which I hinted at in my

:38:09. > :38:19.interventions to the Minister? It relates to new clause 40 eight. The

:38:20. > :38:25.fire -- 48. I welcome this change. It is something I wish I had been

:38:26. > :38:28.able to bring in when I was the Fire Service's minister myself. But the

:38:29. > :38:35.climate was not there for it to be done. I congratulate him up on it.

:38:36. > :38:42.It is a more front line experience. My involvement goes back to my

:38:43. > :38:48.involvement with the honourable gentleman the member for Poplar and

:38:49. > :38:54.Limehouse when back 30 years ago I was the leader of the London Fire

:38:55. > :39:01.and civil defence authority. Immediately after the abolition of

:39:02. > :39:13.the GLC. I lied about my age to join up, not actually the case. There was

:39:14. > :39:18.the old school inspectorate then we moved to an arrangement with the

:39:19. > :39:25.chief adviser and we all hoped that peer review and the work of bodies

:39:26. > :39:30.would achieve improvement from within. I think the Minister is

:39:31. > :39:34.right to conclude that is not delivering what we want to do and

:39:35. > :39:39.the evidence the Public Accounts Committee in their report set out

:39:40. > :39:43.very clearly. It is right to move to the inspectorate and I support that.

:39:44. > :39:51.The reason I raise what seems like an arcane and technical point is

:39:52. > :39:56.this. I will amplify why I think it is right. One problem with the old

:39:57. > :40:04.inspectorate is that it tended to be a bit of an old boys' club for

:40:05. > :40:08.retired senior officers. Must invariably, appointments came from a

:40:09. > :40:14.very narrow group of retired senior officers and it was a bit of a

:40:15. > :40:17.revolving door. Or questions both about it being up-to-the-minute in

:40:18. > :40:22.its knowledge and to the degree of independence it would bring.

:40:23. > :40:27.Genuinely an inspector can sometimes have to say hard things to a chief

:40:28. > :40:31.officer and his management team and that is not too easy if you've come

:40:32. > :40:35.fairly recently from within the ranks of a fairly close service.

:40:36. > :40:41.Where appropriate their should be greater flexibility to bring out a

:40:42. > :40:45.contractor who has expertise in the appropriate fields. It may not be

:40:46. > :40:49.for the whole of the inspection but it could be for a specific part. The

:40:50. > :40:56.obvious example is financial matters. It works also in relation

:40:57. > :41:00.to things like assurance of operational resilience because there

:41:01. > :41:05.is expertise now in the private sector as well as the public sector

:41:06. > :41:15.that can appropriately be brought to bear. I am obliged he gives way on

:41:16. > :41:18.this point. Might it also, in the new environment where we are

:41:19. > :41:24.encouraging greater collaboration between services, be the case that

:41:25. > :41:30.the fire inspectorate might want to lean on other senior members of the

:41:31. > :41:37.uniformed blue-eyed services to add their expertise in multi-agency

:41:38. > :41:42.working to support the inspectorate? My honourable friend, also a former

:41:43. > :41:51.chair of London Fire and emergency planning authority, makes an

:41:52. > :41:54.important point. All of us favour greater collaboration between the

:41:55. > :41:59.blue light services. I know that is where the Minister wants to go, too.

:42:00. > :42:04.We all want a formula to achieve that. My concern is that the wording

:42:05. > :42:07.as it is might make that hard work although I have no doubt that is not

:42:08. > :42:16.the intention of ministers. The reason I raise the concern is that

:42:17. > :42:21.as it reads, the new subsection A5, placed in section 28 of the 2004

:42:22. > :42:28.Fire And Rescue Services act, doesn't seem to cover the use of

:42:29. > :42:35.contractors. I will look very carefully at this and get a third

:42:36. > :42:39.reading this evening in the Lords and if I need to clarify that

:42:40. > :42:43.position then I will do so by government memo in Lords. I am

:42:44. > :42:49.grateful for that. That shortens what I have to say. To fortify him

:42:50. > :42:56.in saying that I think we all agree that the Public Accounts Committee

:42:57. > :43:03.found evidence that peer review process was not regarded as

:43:04. > :43:10.adequate. If the Minister is happy to deal with what might be on

:43:11. > :43:15.unintended think, I wish him well and I wish the Fire and Rescue

:43:16. > :43:24.Service well and I am happy to work to achieve that objective. I would

:43:25. > :43:28.like to address a few words to new clause 12 which stands in my name.

:43:29. > :43:36.It would amend section one of the coroners and Justice act 2009 and

:43:37. > :43:44.scrapped distressing rules that said dementia sufferers who die in care

:43:45. > :43:48.homes are classed as being in state detention under some circumstances.

:43:49. > :43:52.Families told me of their distress of having to wait to bury their

:43:53. > :43:59.loved ones because inquests are required into the deaths of dementia

:44:00. > :44:09.sufferers who are subject to things irrespective of the circumstances of

:44:10. > :44:22.the death. The threshold was Laurent of what is considered deprivation of

:44:23. > :44:27.liberty in care. It was said all persons who died subject to this

:44:28. > :44:38.order must be subject to a coroner's investigation. In the 2009 act, they

:44:39. > :44:42.are deemed to be in state detention. The amendment is suggested by the

:44:43. > :44:48.Chief coroner himself in response to and recognition of the distress

:44:49. > :44:53.caused to relatives. The chief coroner indicated that a simple

:44:54. > :44:57.amendment of the coroners and Justice act 2009 might solve the

:44:58. > :45:01.problem of unnecessary cases being reported to the coroner at least in

:45:02. > :45:08.the short term. The chief coroner said for the purposes of this act, a

:45:09. > :45:13.person who dies and subject two and those Asian granted under schedule

:45:14. > :45:17.A1 to their mental capacity act 2005, depriving that person of his

:45:18. > :45:24.or her liberty and detaining them in hospital or a care home does not die

:45:25. > :45:27.while in custody or otherwise in state detention. Constituents have

:45:28. > :45:33.contacted me including one woman who wrote after her mother died in a

:45:34. > :45:37.nursing home. She said her mother suffered from dementia and other

:45:38. > :45:41.problems and they sat with her for four days and nights before she

:45:42. > :45:49.died. Within one hour of her death uniformed police arrived and they

:45:50. > :45:55.were asked to leave the room. I am grateful. I too have had a very

:45:56. > :45:58.similar case of a constituent whose mother was in a nursing home who

:45:59. > :46:04.died and almost immediately the police came and for ten days had

:46:05. > :46:09.hold of her body. Doesn't that cause great distress to people at a time

:46:10. > :46:13.of mourning? Isn't it why we really need to tighten up on the rules

:46:14. > :46:18.regarding the deprivation of liberty?

:46:19. > :46:24.My honourable friend is right and I think there are many experiences of

:46:25. > :46:29.many people across the country of that kind of unnecessary distress

:46:30. > :46:34.and trauma. Since tabling the amendment the Law Commission issued

:46:35. > :46:46.an interim statement on May 25 which said that there is a compelling case

:46:47. > :46:50.for replacing this and the proposed new scheme should be removed from

:46:51. > :46:55.the definition. The current law requires an inquest where a person

:46:56. > :47:01.dies under a Doles, even if they cause of death was entirely natural,

:47:02. > :47:06.was seen to be causing unnecessary work for the sector families. He

:47:07. > :47:12.said they had received reports of police arriving at the deathbed of

:47:13. > :47:17.the deceased and one reported their impression of a crime scene and

:47:18. > :47:20.another referred to issuers of whether the disease body should go

:47:21. > :47:30.to the official mortuary rather than the family's chosen funeral

:47:31. > :47:35.director. I am proposing that we take the opportunity in the policing

:47:36. > :47:38.and crime in Bill to amend this legislation now because it offers us

:47:39. > :47:43.the opportunity to do that through this piece of primary legislation.

:47:44. > :47:47.Realistically the Law Commission reported interim and we would have

:47:48. > :47:51.to wait for the final report and then for legislation to be drafted

:47:52. > :47:55.and enacted and it could take up to two years and during that time many

:47:56. > :48:00.more families will continue to suffer distress. We talk a lot about

:48:01. > :48:08.supporting carers and I know from my own personal experience how

:48:09. > :48:10.distressing it can be to watch a loved relatives struggled to cope

:48:11. > :48:13.with dementia and their families struggle to support them. To then

:48:14. > :48:15.put relatives who have cared to the limits of their emotional capacity

:48:16. > :48:18.through the further trauma I have described at the time of the death

:48:19. > :48:23.of their loved one is heartless. I am not moving this amendment today

:48:24. > :48:28.but I hope that the Minister will have heard what I have said and I

:48:29. > :48:36.hope he will be talking to his colleagues in the health Department.

:48:37. > :48:39.I would like to say that you do the honourable lady for being generous

:48:40. > :48:43.in giving way. That is exactly what we are doing, not just in light of

:48:44. > :48:49.the Law Commission's partial report but also because of work that is

:48:50. > :48:54.already taking place. She is probing in exactly the right direction. Can

:48:55. > :48:59.I thank the Minister for that very positive reply from him. I look

:49:00. > :49:03.forward, when this bill goes to the Lords, to see the government's

:49:04. > :49:07.response amended to the bill. If that is the right phrase. Something

:49:08. > :49:18.like that! I thank him very much for that response. I rise to speak to

:49:19. > :49:23.the amendment tabled by my honourable friend for Broxbourne and

:49:24. > :49:28.the right Honourable member for North Norfolk. As the chair of the

:49:29. > :49:37.all-party group for mental health I just to caveat my remarks by saying

:49:38. > :49:40.the substantial changes in this bill for section 135 and 136 of the

:49:41. > :49:46.mental health bill are very big changes and it would be fair to say

:49:47. > :49:50.that in the last few years there has been considerable improvement in the

:49:51. > :49:54.way in which police forces and police officers deal with people in

:49:55. > :50:02.mental health crisis. I wanted to make some brief remarks in relation

:50:03. > :50:09.firstly to the new clause 42 and a new clause 43 tabled by my

:50:10. > :50:11.honourable friend for Broxbourne in relation to police officers being

:50:12. > :50:19.deployed in psychiatric wards because I think this does raise some

:50:20. > :50:26.important questions about when police officers are requested to

:50:27. > :50:37.take action within health -based settings. I think this speaks to a

:50:38. > :50:45.very important developing relationship between the police and

:50:46. > :50:52.the health service because clearly there will be circumstances in which

:50:53. > :50:57.because of the particular nature of an individual's condition and other

:50:58. > :51:03.circumstances in which it may be appropriate for police to be

:51:04. > :51:07.deployed in psychiatric settings it seems to me that it should be only

:51:08. > :51:15.in very, very exceptional circumstances. It might be that we

:51:16. > :51:22.need also to look at the way in which acute psychiatric units go

:51:23. > :51:27.about risk profiling individual patients which are in those acute

:51:28. > :51:34.settings. In order to ensure that it is very rare and exceptional that

:51:35. > :51:41.police officers are called upon to take action within those psychiatric

:51:42. > :51:45.settings, so I broadly support the intentions of the clauses which have

:51:46. > :51:51.been brought forward by my honourable friend for Broxbourne,

:51:52. > :51:56.who I know has done a lot of important work and he is a champion

:51:57. > :52:03.for this area and I also have a lot of sympathy for his new clause 43

:52:04. > :52:09.which talks about Taser 's and again I would agree with my honourable

:52:10. > :52:12.friend that it is only in the most exceptional circumstances that

:52:13. > :52:17.Tasers should be used within acute psychiatric settings and we should

:52:18. > :52:21.have very clear guidance and guidelines as to the appropriate

:52:22. > :52:28.time at which that kind of force should be deployed. In relation to

:52:29. > :52:33.new clause 58, tabled by the Right Honourable member for North Norfolk,

:52:34. > :52:36.we have not yet had an opportunity to speak to his amendment but I

:52:37. > :52:49.think it does raise some very important issues in relation to the

:52:50. > :52:53.implementation of the changes to section 135, that it is

:52:54. > :52:58.controversial that the idea of the way that a person's Private dwelling

:52:59. > :53:03.being characterised as a place of safety and it seems to me that his

:53:04. > :53:10.proposed amendment does raise some important questions which again

:53:11. > :53:16.speak to the relationship between policing and the health service and

:53:17. > :53:24.in terms of places of safety because I think we do need to think about

:53:25. > :53:30.how we can provide a broader range of alternative places of safety,

:53:31. > :53:35.some of which might not be within, they might not be health -based or

:53:36. > :53:37.national health service based places of safety, they might be in the

:53:38. > :53:47.voluntary sector and they might be in crisis houses and we do need to

:53:48. > :53:53.think about the capacity in the system to provide appropriate places

:53:54. > :53:57.of safety so I think that is... I think this is a really important

:53:58. > :54:02.point but to be brutally obsoletes -- listing government, unless we

:54:03. > :54:05.say, no, we will be the Port last resort, we will continue to be the

:54:06. > :54:09.first place they come to a gnat pushes other departments into

:54:10. > :54:16.getting their act together to do it so for the police having to say now

:54:17. > :54:18.that we will not hold people in police cells inappropriately because

:54:19. > :54:26.they can do it for other years and that will force other departments to

:54:27. > :54:32.do it. I thank the Minister for the intervention and there may be a

:54:33. > :54:36.role, for example, for Police and Crime Commissioners to explore this

:54:37. > :54:41.need to work more closely with the health service and others to provide

:54:42. > :54:45.the capacity for appropriate places of safety such that police officers

:54:46. > :54:54.do not have to make the sorts of decisions that are implied in new

:54:55. > :54:58.clause 58, so I think that, as I said at the beginning, the changes

:54:59. > :55:02.that were proposed in the bill overall are essential and they are

:55:03. > :55:06.transformative and I think we have to be very clear about what we mean

:55:07. > :55:14.by exceptional circumstances in which we are detaining people and we

:55:15. > :55:18.could move to a system where it becomes inappropriate in all

:55:19. > :55:23.circumstances even for adults to be detained in police cells and I

:55:24. > :55:26.recognise there may be a need to define exceptional circumstances in

:55:27. > :55:35.which that might happen and I think the changes proposed are positive

:55:36. > :55:38.and I think the amendments tabled by new clause 58 and others raise some

:55:39. > :55:45.important questions that the Minister should consider in summing

:55:46. > :55:50.up. It is a pleasure to follow the honourable member for Halesowen and

:55:51. > :55:53.Rowley Regis. I very much welcome the contribution from the honourable

:55:54. > :55:59.member for Broxbourne who does a lot of campaigning on this issue. I have

:56:00. > :56:04.tabled a number of new clauses and amendments and the first one I

:56:05. > :56:09.wanted to deal with was the issue of whether we should be disallowing the

:56:10. > :56:15.use of the Taser is on psychiatric wards and I should say, before I get

:56:16. > :56:19.into the detail of this, that I, like other speakers, want to

:56:20. > :56:26.acknowledge the inspiring leadership of many leaders around the country

:56:27. > :56:31.who have, through force of strong moral leadership, managed to change

:56:32. > :56:37.practice in many parts of the country and we owe them an enormous

:56:38. > :56:44.debt of gratitude for that. The issue of the Taser is on psychiatric

:56:45. > :56:48.wards, the honourable member for Broxbourne made issue -- a reference

:56:49. > :56:52.to black mental health UK, great and importing campaigning organisation,

:56:53. > :57:00.and they have, as he mentioned, drawn attention to the fact that in

:57:01. > :57:04.particular black African Caribbean men are disproportionately

:57:05. > :57:08.overrepresented in section 136 detentions, compared to the general

:57:09. > :57:12.population. It is incidentally a conclusion from the joint Home

:57:13. > :57:18.Office and independent health review of section 135136 and black African

:57:19. > :57:23.and Caribbean men are in particular reporting that the use of force was

:57:24. > :57:28.more likely to be used against them by the police. I want to challenge

:57:29. > :57:36.the assumption that force is necessary at the level that is used

:57:37. > :57:40.at the moment. Black mental health UK referring their briefing for this

:57:41. > :57:46.debate to the United Nations committee against torture, which has

:57:47. > :57:52.stated that Taser weapons promote extreme plane, constitute a form of

:57:53. > :57:56.torture and in certain extreme cases can cause death. Whilst termed

:57:57. > :58:01.non-lethal there have been at least ten known deaths associated with the

:58:02. > :58:06.use of Taser in the last ten years. What I want to do by initiating this

:58:07. > :58:13.debate is to get a debate going on this subject and I am delighted that

:58:14. > :58:19.the Home Secretary herself has admitted, and I quote directly from

:58:20. > :58:22.her, I have been hearing stories, for example, that Tasers had been

:58:23. > :58:25.used in mental health wards. You think, hang on a minute, what is

:58:26. > :58:29.happening here? That is what we should all be doing and we should be

:58:30. > :58:35.questioning whether it is appropriate and that is why I have

:58:36. > :58:43.tabled this new clause. I then table a clause in effect to prohibit the

:58:44. > :58:48.use of police cells as a place of safety for adults. The government,

:58:49. > :58:52.and I absolutely welcome this, has implemented through this bill, the

:58:53. > :58:56.recommendation from the joint review to end the use of police cells for

:58:57. > :59:00.children and young people. When you look around the country and you see

:59:01. > :59:04.what has happened due to the inspiring leadership of many police

:59:05. > :59:08.officers working closely with mental health services, they have actually

:59:09. > :59:22.ended the use of police cells in some parts of the country in all

:59:23. > :59:26.but the most extreme circumstances so in London, for example, there are

:59:27. > :59:28.hardly any adults now going into police cells. That is a remarkable

:59:29. > :59:31.achievement. In the West Midlands hardly anyone for an hour to years

:59:32. > :59:34.has gone into a police cell as a result of section one 26. In these

:59:35. > :59:36.areas -- if these areas of the country, with impressive leadership,

:59:37. > :59:39.can do it then we should be challenging every part of the

:59:40. > :59:42.country to do so and the legislation should lead the way. The Minister

:59:43. > :59:48.himself, and I welcome the fact that he said this second reading, he

:59:49. > :59:52.said, unless we actually put a stop to the use of police cells and say

:59:53. > :59:57.enough is enough then we will not get the provision we need from other

:59:58. > :00:01.agencies. Absolutely right. We cannot use as an excuse not to do

:00:02. > :00:04.this the fact that the NHS is under pressure. If it is wrong, it is

:00:05. > :00:12.wrong, and it needs absolutely to be challenged. I then refer to my new

:00:13. > :00:17.clause 45, which is to ensure that in every case where there has been

:00:18. > :00:21.evidence of child sexual exploitation, that the victims are

:00:22. > :00:27.referred for a mental health assessment. In future in mind, the

:00:28. > :00:31.report that I published in March last year, following a task force

:00:32. > :00:36.that we set up to look at children's mental health services, it set out

:00:37. > :00:42.the need for trauma focused care, and the need for sexually abused or

:00:43. > :00:46.exploited children to receive, and I quote, a comprehensive specialist

:00:47. > :00:50.initial assessment and referral to appropriate services providing

:00:51. > :00:53.evidence -based interventions, according to their need. This new

:00:54. > :01:02.clause seeks to implement our recommendation. The LGA, in their

:01:03. > :01:06.briefing for this debate, has supported the intention, but raised

:01:07. > :01:10.concern about investment. Are we really saying that the lack of

:01:11. > :01:15.availability of mental health services is a reason not to ensure

:01:16. > :01:19.that every child who has suffered sexual exploitation gets the chance

:01:20. > :01:23.to proper assessment? Surely we have two set what is right in is

:01:24. > :01:28.legislation and then ensure that we provide the facilities to make that

:01:29. > :01:33.happen. Anything short of that would not, surely, be accessed double.

:01:34. > :01:44.There are very many individuals who, after suffering abuse and

:01:45. > :01:46.exploitation as a child, go on to be very ill in adult life. They suffer

:01:47. > :01:48.things like associative disorder, I have had a briefing on that very

:01:49. > :01:51.recently, it completely takes over your life and means you cannot work

:01:52. > :01:55.and you have difficult relationships throughout your life, so the cost to

:01:56. > :02:00.society is enormous, so let's make sure that we get those children the

:02:01. > :02:07.assessment of their needs that they surely deserve.

:02:08. > :02:15.Next I refer to new clause 58, the prohibition of using the home as a

:02:16. > :02:19.place of safety under section one 36. Under section 135 where a police

:02:20. > :02:24.officer goes to someone's home and it may be appropriate to stay with

:02:25. > :02:30.that person in their home under section one 35. Under section 136,

:02:31. > :02:35.to take someone by force to their home as a place of safety, the

:02:36. > :02:42.organisation Mind raised very serious concerns. Would he share my

:02:43. > :02:48.concerns which I raised in committee about detention at home, which is

:02:49. > :02:51.although it is welcome in this bill that it is going to try to reduce

:02:52. > :03:03.the number of people going into police cells, the fact to position

:03:04. > :03:06.-- de facto position is to take them home but it might be because of a

:03:07. > :03:15.lack of beds that is what they have to do? I am grateful for that

:03:16. > :03:19.intervention. He is right. The fear is that it becomes the default

:03:20. > :03:23.position because of the lack of resources in some localities. That

:03:24. > :03:29.would be a big mistake. In circumstances where section 136 is

:03:30. > :03:35.used, it should be a health -based place of safety the person is taken

:03:36. > :03:37.to. There is a real effort underway, showing real signs of success around

:03:38. > :03:44.the country through use of things like street triage to substantially

:03:45. > :03:48.reduce the use of section 136 at all and deal with issues in a more

:03:49. > :03:54.informal way. Where it must be used, we have to make sure the person is

:03:55. > :04:00.taken to the right place. Would he accept that perhaps we need to think

:04:01. > :04:07.about the definition of what we mean by a health -based place of safety?

:04:08. > :04:13.Somewhere in control of the National Health Service. But maybe that needs

:04:14. > :04:16.to be broader so a place of safety could be in a voluntary

:04:17. > :04:21.organisation, different location. That would be one way of improving

:04:22. > :04:27.capacity. I noticed his remarks in his speech and he is absolutely

:04:28. > :04:30.right. A crisis house, a place of safety provided by a particular

:04:31. > :04:35.community for people from that community, may well be the best

:04:36. > :04:42.place for that person to go. We should be willing to open up that

:04:43. > :04:46.definition in an appropriate way. I refer to new clause 59 which is

:04:47. > :04:52.about the right to an appropriate adult to those detained under

:04:53. > :04:56.sections 135 and 136. You have the right to mental health advocate if

:04:57. > :05:05.you are detained under the Mental Health Act except under section 135

:05:06. > :05:09.or 136. It seems to me that in all those circumstances the person may

:05:10. > :05:15.be very, very vulnerable and the idea of having a right to an

:05:16. > :05:18.appropriate adult, as Mind has argued for, is something the

:05:19. > :05:28.legislation should embrace. Finally I want to refer to when the clock

:05:29. > :05:32.should start. The bill reduces the maximum length of time someone

:05:33. > :05:40.should be held under section 136 whilst the assessment takes place,

:05:41. > :05:45.should be down to 24 hours. It may well be that if there is pressure on

:05:46. > :05:50.resources and facilities, someone could be kept in a police van,

:05:51. > :05:53.driven around a city, it sometimes happens, and that's time under the

:05:54. > :06:01.Government's current proposed definition would not count. Some

:06:02. > :06:07.hours could pass before the person arrives at the place of safety and

:06:08. > :06:12.other argument, again, Mind puts forward, contained within my

:06:13. > :06:15.amendment 125, is that the clock should start when the person is

:06:16. > :06:24.detained rather than when they arrive at a place of safety. So this

:06:25. > :06:29.set of amendments... One of the concerns we have about this is that

:06:30. > :06:35.we then set a target for the individual that needs that help to

:06:36. > :06:38.be taken to somewhere quickly rather than the right place for their

:06:39. > :06:46.needs. That is my concern that particular point. I do understand we

:06:47. > :06:51.have to balance all of these things but what I am after is that

:06:52. > :06:54.legislation should put pressure on agencies to provide sufficient

:06:55. > :06:59.resources to meet a clear need, as is not the case at the moment. I

:07:00. > :07:03.would conclude by saying that this group of amendments and new clauses

:07:04. > :07:07.is designed to improve the rights of people with mental ill-health who at

:07:08. > :07:16.the moment are too often let down by the system. I wish to address new

:07:17. > :07:19.clause 23. Very briefly. And take the Minister on a very small

:07:20. > :07:26.metaphorical journey, may be nowhere near as far as the amendment or new

:07:27. > :07:29.clause 23 seeks to go. I am sorry if I am trying the patience of the

:07:30. > :07:33.Minister and the House, because he has been exceptionally courteous

:07:34. > :07:40.today and to me in previous aspects of this bill. Let me just say what

:07:41. > :07:48.the mischief is about these face coverings. In my intervention

:07:49. > :07:53.earlier I mentioned to lack. One was the Conservative Party conference in

:07:54. > :07:58.Manchester and the other was in my constituency where two people in

:07:59. > :08:07.masks in the badger cull the Labor Department said a farmhouse as it

:08:08. > :08:14.was getting dark for several -- deliberately parked a car outside a

:08:15. > :08:20.farmhouse to intimidate those people. If the police had been able

:08:21. > :08:31.to ask the people to take off the masks the intimidation would have

:08:32. > :08:37.stopped on the spot. In those incidents, asking those people to

:08:38. > :08:51.take the masks offer would have stopped things. I want to simply say

:08:52. > :08:56.let's look at section 66 eight eight of the public order act which

:08:57. > :09:00.requires a constable on duty to require written consent before the

:09:01. > :09:05.mask is taken off. Can I just say where I am coming from? There are

:09:06. > :09:08.often what happens is they get on the radio and they get a verbal

:09:09. > :09:15.consent and then the written consent is given afterwards. Technically a

:09:16. > :09:19.crime is being committed because they haven't got prior written

:09:20. > :09:24.consent. I am saying let's do away with written consent. We train our

:09:25. > :09:28.constables to a high degree and put trust in them so let's trust them in

:09:29. > :09:32.the individual situation. If they think this masks are a problem, we

:09:33. > :09:39.should give them the power is to be able to demand those face masks are

:09:40. > :09:49.withdrawn immediately. It may be able to be done by secondary

:09:50. > :09:57.legislation. If he would do that I think we will have achieved what we

:09:58. > :10:08.want this afternoon. Can I move new clause 24 which stands in my name?

:10:09. > :10:14.And also refer to amendments in the name of the members for North

:10:15. > :10:17.Norfolk and Broxburn. Raised was the fact that the state's power to

:10:18. > :10:26.deprive someone of liberty is one of the most corneum acts of state there

:10:27. > :10:32.is. -- Draconian. In the Mental Health Act, if you are detained

:10:33. > :10:40.other than under section 135 or 136, you are entitled to a mental health

:10:41. > :10:45.advocates. Under section 135 and 136, you are not. The only way in

:10:46. > :10:53.which you could access legal advice, which is referred to in the

:10:54. > :10:59.Honourable member for Broxburn's amendment, as if you are at a police

:11:00. > :11:04.station. But they seem to want to stop people going to the police

:11:05. > :11:07.station in the first place because clearly a police cell is not the

:11:08. > :11:12.correct place for someone in mental health crisis. The important thing

:11:13. > :11:17.is that those individuals do need some advocacy. Under the situation

:11:18. > :11:24.we have currently, if they're not taken to a police cell or station,

:11:25. > :11:28.they will not have access to legal advice or advocacy. My amendment is

:11:29. > :11:36.trying to get some parity here in terms with the rest of the Mental

:11:37. > :11:43.Health Act. So people have advocacy. I am pleased that the Minister who

:11:44. > :11:49.responded to this in committee has taken a seat because it is an issue

:11:50. > :11:54.which she has looked at. I don't intend to press this to the vote but

:11:55. > :12:01.I think it is important we have some system in place where people are

:12:02. > :12:10.detained under section 135 and 136 can access some advice. I share the

:12:11. > :12:16.point made in the amendment from the member for North Norfolk, which I

:12:17. > :12:22.think is a similar thing in terms of individuals having access to an

:12:23. > :12:33.adult hooked advocate on their behalf. One thing which I do agree

:12:34. > :12:43.with the honourable member for hills on and Rowley Regis has said is many

:12:44. > :12:46.things in this bill are not necessarily the police's

:12:47. > :12:49.responsibility. In many cases they are filling a gap which has been

:12:50. > :12:54.there because of lack of funding or support or in some cases the

:12:55. > :12:59.disjunction which exists between mental health services, local

:13:00. > :13:03.authorities and others, and the police are seen as the last resort.

:13:04. > :13:10.He is right in highlighting that. That comes on to the point of new

:13:11. > :13:15.clause 26, in the name of the honourable member for Broxburn. I

:13:16. > :13:22.welcome this because I think there is good practice already in many

:13:23. > :13:25.police forces were they have mental health training. In Durham, the

:13:26. > :13:30.Chief Constable instigated a whole force review in terms of making

:13:31. > :13:35.people have access to mental health training. It is important to have

:13:36. > :13:41.consistency but it also empowers and gives more expertise to police

:13:42. > :13:50.forces to know how to actually use not just these two sections, one in

:13:51. > :13:55.three five and one to six, but other sections. Can I pay tribute to

:13:56. > :13:59.police forces up and down the country? I think there is good

:14:00. > :14:06.practice. In committee we referred to The Concordat, a good move

:14:07. > :14:12.forward ensuring there is a joined up at approach at local level

:14:13. > :14:21.between police forces and health services and local authorities. I

:14:22. > :14:28.know the Minister is perhaps exploring how we can get some

:14:29. > :14:39.agreement or reporting on what is actually happening at local level.

:14:40. > :14:43.Can I turn to new clause 40? I have to say the member for North Norfolk

:14:44. > :14:48.is doing a great service by putting this amendment down because this is

:14:49. > :14:53.is not being talked about. I totally agree. There is no circumstance

:14:54. > :15:07.which I envisage where you need to use a Taser on a mental health ward.

:15:08. > :15:13.The honourable member praised the Black Mental Health Uk who have done

:15:14. > :15:24.a lot of work on this issue. What struck me is that something has to

:15:25. > :15:30.be done because there is no mathematical conclusion you can come

:15:31. > :15:36.to that people from black and Afro-Caribbean communities are being

:15:37. > :15:40.disproportionately detained to any other section of the community. It

:15:41. > :15:45.cannot just be chance that these figures are happening. I would urge

:15:46. > :15:49.the Government to look at this seriously in terms of trying to ask

:15:50. > :16:03.how we can put things in place to ensure that is not the case. The

:16:04. > :16:09.other amendment, new clause 40 three. If we will not have

:16:10. > :16:12.prohibition on use of lasers, I would agree with this amendment so

:16:13. > :16:17.at least we would have statistics to say when and where they are being

:16:18. > :16:25.used. I refer to new clause 50 eight. A similar amendment that I

:16:26. > :16:29.put down in committee. It is a concern I have. Can I credit the

:16:30. > :16:33.Government in its efforts for trying to ensure that people in mental

:16:34. > :16:39.health crises do not end up in police cells? Unless we have very

:16:40. > :16:45.close monitor reporting that may be a position where you get people

:16:46. > :16:57.under section 135 or 136... And can I say to the honourable

:16:58. > :17:01.gentleman, isn't it remarkable how far this house has come in the last

:17:02. > :17:04.four years that today we are putting the interest of mental health

:17:05. > :17:09.patients at the centre of what we are discussing and he should take

:17:10. > :17:12.great credit for that personally. I would also credit the honourable

:17:13. > :17:16.gentleman as well as many other people in the house because credit

:17:17. > :17:21.to the government, they have taken the issue very seriously and I think

:17:22. > :17:25.both ministers on the committee are committed to ensuring that we get

:17:26. > :17:34.the best outcomes for people in mental health crisis in the criminal

:17:35. > :17:38.justice system. Can I just say that although we have a situation where

:17:39. > :17:42.the police cells will not be the first resort, which I think they

:17:43. > :17:46.have been in the past, and that is no criticism to the police were

:17:47. > :17:51.taking people there because that was the only place available and we need

:17:52. > :17:56.to closely monitor what happens to people who are detained under

:17:57. > :17:59.section 135 and 136 of this act because I would not want to get into

:18:00. > :18:05.a position where the de facto position is to keep people at home,

:18:06. > :18:08.which might help the statistics of avoiding people going into police

:18:09. > :18:14.cells, but will not be the best place possible for individuals in

:18:15. > :18:19.crisis. What we do need, and The Right Honourable member for

:18:20. > :18:25.Halesowen and Raleigh Regis raised it, it doesn't necessarily have to

:18:26. > :18:33.be a health -- health facility. We need, in this country, a network of

:18:34. > :18:37.place of safety for individuals in mental health crisis and they may be

:18:38. > :18:41.health run and they may be run by charities or others but we need that

:18:42. > :18:45.network because a police cell, and in some cases I don't even think a

:18:46. > :18:49.hospital is the best place for certain people in crisis. Can I

:18:50. > :18:54.finish by saying that I am glad that the changes that are being made in

:18:55. > :18:58.this bill and they are being taken seriously by the government, can I

:18:59. > :19:02.also pay tribute to the way in which both ministers have addressed this

:19:03. > :19:06.in committee and I know that although things are perhaps not

:19:07. > :19:09.going to be put on the face of the bill, working with colleagues at the

:19:10. > :19:15.Department of Health, I think we will get to a situation where people

:19:16. > :19:17.with mental health crises do not actually end up in the criminal

:19:18. > :19:28.justice system because that should be our aim. You caught me by

:19:29. > :19:30.surprise, I must confess. Thank you for the opportunity, it is a

:19:31. > :19:35.pleasure to follow my honourable friend from North Durham. I will not

:19:36. > :19:37.be making reference to the mental health policies and arrangements

:19:38. > :19:42.within this bill but I commend the colleagues who have spoken already

:19:43. > :19:47.in this debate and who have been personally responsible for taking

:19:48. > :19:50.this issue so far, and encourages a government to listen to the

:19:51. > :19:54.arguments that they have been putting forward four years and I

:19:55. > :19:58.commend the government on its response to the debate which

:19:59. > :20:03.obviously took place you can see and generally in its attitude towards

:20:04. > :20:06.mental health. I want to commend my right honourable friend, the Shadow

:20:07. > :20:14.Home Secretary, in the way that he moved his amendments almost in

:20:15. > :20:17.conclusion as part of the campaign on Hillsborough, passionately and

:20:18. > :20:21.powerfully, and I hope that the government will be in their position

:20:22. > :20:25.to respond positively to his request for his amendments to be accepted,

:20:26. > :20:32.if only in principle. I look forward to the Minister making a response

:20:33. > :20:40.when he response to this debate. I only want to speak very briefly to

:20:41. > :20:45.new clause 48 and new schedule one. These clauses propose to recreate a

:20:46. > :20:50.national Fire Service inspectorate in England. It is a recreation of a

:20:51. > :20:54.national Fire Service Inspectorate. My friend, the minister, the former

:20:55. > :20:59.firefighter, like I, when we exchange of brigade matters he

:21:00. > :21:03.sometimes throws back at me when I asked him to do things that I didn't

:21:04. > :21:08.do them when I was Fire Minister and why should he do them? I am asking

:21:09. > :21:11.him why he is recreating the Fire Service Inspectorate when we did

:21:12. > :21:14.away with it and put other arrangements in place and I would be

:21:15. > :21:20.very interested in what the explanation for that will be. But I

:21:21. > :21:23.welcome, as has the honourable member for Bromley and Chislehurst,

:21:24. > :21:27.that the government is recognising that there is a vacuum there, Gap,

:21:28. > :21:31.and something has to be created to fill it, whether it is the

:21:32. > :21:34.Inspectorate, as laid down in the wording of the amendments as they

:21:35. > :21:37.stand at the moment or whether they are changed as it goes to the house

:21:38. > :21:42.of Lords, the fact that the government is moving in this

:21:43. > :21:47.direction is welcome. As we discussed in Westminster Hall last

:21:48. > :21:50.week with the Minister, the increasingly, the increasing number

:21:51. > :21:56.of calls from flooding that the Fire Service deals with, the transition

:21:57. > :21:59.into more medical emergency calls, and the arrangements within the

:22:00. > :22:03.national Health Service to do more social care visits, along with fire

:22:04. > :22:05.safety visits, demonstrates that the Fire Service is moving into

:22:06. > :22:09.different territory and different skills have been developed which

:22:10. > :22:14.need different resources as well as the staff to do them. As I raced in

:22:15. > :22:18.the Westminster Hall debate last week, there are criticisms being

:22:19. > :22:23.levelled at the service at the moment, some of which are being

:22:24. > :22:27.blamed for the level of reductions in the service. The Fire and Rescue

:22:28. > :22:31.Service is a victim of its success in recent decades, having cut the

:22:32. > :22:35.number of calls on the number of fires and reduce the number of

:22:36. > :22:42.deaths in city centres, it means it is prone to be able to see the loss

:22:43. > :22:45.of fire stations and fire of prices and as the Minister knows the

:22:46. > :22:50.figures that I quoted in Westminster Hall last week mean there are nearly

:22:51. > :22:56.7000 fewer firefighters in position in the UK now than there were in

:22:57. > :22:57.2010 and that has raised a number of eyebrows and question marks about

:22:58. > :23:04.attendance times being met and resources being available and asking

:23:05. > :23:11.whether the service is now equipped to do the job that it needs to do. I

:23:12. > :23:14.am happy to give way. I thank the honourable gentleman who has great

:23:15. > :23:18.experience in the Fire and Rescue Service in a number of capacities.

:23:19. > :23:22.Does he agree with me that although the operational issues which he is

:23:23. > :23:25.quite rightly raising a very important, that the Public Accounts

:23:26. > :23:28.Committee found that in the wake of the abolition of the audit

:23:29. > :23:32.commission, the governance and scrutiny and oversight of so many

:23:33. > :23:36.Fire And Rescue Services and the cosy relationship between the

:23:37. > :23:40.authorities and those services were unsatisfactory in terms of value for

:23:41. > :23:44.the taxpayer pound? I do agree with the honourable gentleman as it was

:23:45. > :23:47.the same point raised by the honourable member for Bromley and

:23:48. > :23:50.Chislehurst and there is the argument that the Minister will be

:23:51. > :23:53.putting forward and we will be helping the government that there

:23:54. > :23:58.needs to be something put in place to be able to make the measurements

:23:59. > :24:03.that he refers to. Having said all of that I am curious about the

:24:04. > :24:08.lateness of the arrival of the amendments and I know the Minister

:24:09. > :24:11.referred very positively in his opening comments about the consents

:24:12. > :24:17.and is in committee and the ability of both sides helping each other out

:24:18. > :24:26.to make progress in the bill and I commend my honourable friend for

:24:27. > :24:28.West Ham because she was arguing the case about having something in place

:24:29. > :24:31.to assess the ability of the Fire Service to carry out the functions

:24:32. > :24:34.that we all want to see it doing and it is to the Minister's that he has

:24:35. > :24:37.brought forward the amendment and the new schedule to address a

:24:38. > :24:44.particular issue. I did mention intervention earlier a curiosity

:24:45. > :24:52.about whether the government had looked at the UK service as a

:24:53. > :24:56.potential vehicle to try and carry out the kind of function that has

:24:57. > :25:03.been proposed year. My memory of when I was in the fire Brigade with

:25:04. > :25:07.13 years as an operational firefighter, I did possess a pate in

:25:08. > :25:10.Her Majesty Inspectorate drilled in the fire station and I have to

:25:11. > :25:13.question the value of them. We tried for weeks and weeks to get them

:25:14. > :25:18.right. They still didn't go right entirely sometimes, but we question

:25:19. > :25:23.the actual value of that amount of rehearsal and whether or not the

:25:24. > :25:31.practice actually basically made the whole exercise worthless, so the

:25:32. > :25:37.question is, having decided to abolish the HMS -- the HMI, because

:25:38. > :25:42.of scepticism and cynicism, the honourable member referred to the

:25:43. > :25:46.old boys network, the government is trying to propose something new, I

:25:47. > :25:52.hope, although what is being proposed is a re-creation of what

:25:53. > :25:55.went before. Having gone to DC LG and having moved back to the Home

:25:56. > :25:58.Office, there seems to be a replication of Her Majesty 's

:25:59. > :26:01.Inspectorate of police and Her Majesty 's Inspectorate of prisons

:26:02. > :26:05.service and we don't get Her Majesty 's Inspectorate of fire so I would

:26:06. > :26:09.be interested in listening mode to the Minister and more to debates on

:26:10. > :26:17.the other place. I hope it will get more scrutiny and confidence in the

:26:18. > :26:20.Fire Service has always been high and it is high but it needs

:26:21. > :26:24.professional underpinning and validation, not only for public

:26:25. > :26:27.confidence and value for money but also for the safety of the

:26:28. > :26:30.firefighters on the front line who put themselves on that line to

:26:31. > :26:35.protect the public. I look forward to more expensive -- extensive

:26:36. > :26:39.debate when this goes to the other place and I look forward to some

:26:40. > :26:43.comments from the Minister when he sums up because this is a positive

:26:44. > :26:47.step forward and we need to make sure that the Fire Service can

:26:48. > :26:50.demonstrate, to its own satisfaction, to our satisfaction,

:26:51. > :26:54.and to the public that it is equipped resourced unable to do the

:26:55. > :27:00.job that we all admire it for doing and we wanted to carry on doing in

:27:01. > :27:02.the future. First of all, may I apologise, although I was here for

:27:03. > :27:06.the opening speech from the Minister, had to go and check

:27:07. > :27:10.delegated legislation and you were kind enough to put me on the panel

:27:11. > :27:15.of chairs, so I am sorry that I have not been president for whole debate.

:27:16. > :27:19.I want to speak to new clause 23 which was so ably moved by my

:27:20. > :27:23.honourable and learn it friend for Harborough. I understand that this

:27:24. > :27:29.amendment will not be pushed to a tonight and I understand that there

:27:30. > :27:33.is going to a review under Pace and I understand that the Minister has

:27:34. > :27:37.listened carefully to all of the arguments that have been made and if

:27:38. > :27:43.we are going to have a review I think there is an opportunity, and I

:27:44. > :27:49.want to use my brief remarks to talk about this, there is an opportunity

:27:50. > :27:53.to have a debate in this country about face coverings are generally.

:27:54. > :28:02.I think that many people in our country feel that this is quite

:28:03. > :28:07.un-British and except in exceptional services -- circumstances is not

:28:08. > :28:13.necessary for any reason. I don't want to suggest that we should take

:28:14. > :28:16.heavy-handed universal action to prevent people from covering their

:28:17. > :28:25.face in this country because I think that it is also in a sense

:28:26. > :28:28.un-British but actually what we believe in fundamentally, as a

:28:29. > :28:33.nation, is the freedom of people to live their lives, for whatever

:28:34. > :28:40.reason, in the way that they want, as long as they don't alarm or

:28:41. > :28:44.intimidate other people, and I know that other countries in Europe, for

:28:45. > :28:48.instance of France, Belgium, I believe, perfectly moderate and

:28:49. > :28:52.sensible and freedom loving countries, have decided to ban face

:28:53. > :28:56.coverings in public and I think that is probably not the way they would

:28:57. > :28:59.want to proceed here but what I do believe is that if we are going to

:29:00. > :29:04.have this review, it is an opportunity to have a debate and I

:29:05. > :29:13.certainly follow my honourable friends who have expressed concern

:29:14. > :29:20.about certain situations where people do feel intimidated. It might

:29:21. > :29:26.be in the environs of a hunt or an animal research laboratory, or it

:29:27. > :29:30.might be in the environs of a demonstration outside here, people

:29:31. > :29:33.are, of course, entitled to demonstrate, nobody denies that, but

:29:34. > :29:38.it is very intimidating for the police and the public to see people

:29:39. > :29:43.who are engaged in demonstrations with any kind of face covering, and

:29:44. > :29:48.I understand it is perfectly possible under present arrangements

:29:49. > :29:51.for the authorities to issue written instructions and that the police

:29:52. > :29:54.Council can actually require you to remove your face covering and all of

:29:55. > :29:59.the rest of it but I would like to go further. The way I suggest to

:30:00. > :30:05.this problem is that it should be the right, certainly of a police

:30:06. > :30:11.constable, in a particular situation that could be threatening or

:30:12. > :30:14.intimidate three or violent, or confrontational on both sides, to

:30:15. > :30:21.require somebody to remove the face covering. I also think it should be

:30:22. > :30:25.possible for a chief counsel to do so and they should lay down general

:30:26. > :30:30.prohibitions against face coverings. I also think it should be possible,

:30:31. > :30:34.and I think there should be a public debate about this and I think there

:30:35. > :30:39.are different points of view, it should be possible for the Home

:30:40. > :30:44.Secretary to issue a ban against face coverings in certain situations

:30:45. > :30:46.or in geographical places that are particularly sensitive, for

:30:47. > :30:52.instance, the central areas of the city is the and Westminster, the

:30:53. > :30:59.central part of our capital city, which is sensitive for all sorts of

:31:00. > :31:04.reasons, or in hospitals, schools, law courts, doctors surgeries. I

:31:05. > :31:09.know that not everybody in the house will agree with this but I do think

:31:10. > :31:15.that it is something that many people in the public are concerned

:31:16. > :31:22.about. Nobody is more pro-religious people than myself, nobody is

:31:23. > :31:26.wanting to do more to defend the right of religious people or any

:31:27. > :31:30.other sort of people to dress in anyway they want to, but I do think

:31:31. > :31:35.that there are certain situations, certain parts of the country,

:31:36. > :31:42.certain public places where the public, as a whole, although they

:31:43. > :31:45.are very tolerant of other people's attitudes, way of life and living,

:31:46. > :31:49.don't like the idea of face coverings.

:31:50. > :32:01.That's all I want to say. I hope the Minister will be open-minded about

:32:02. > :32:09.this and he may wish to comment on what I have said when he sums up. It

:32:10. > :32:17.is a real privilege to the summing up this set of amendments in this

:32:18. > :32:22.group. Can I thank the shadow police Minister for giving me some time to

:32:23. > :32:26.smack he could easily have spoken again to the amendments. I am

:32:27. > :32:29.pleased to have a little bit of time to talk through some of these

:32:30. > :32:34.things. I have given some indications during my interventions

:32:35. > :32:44.to honourable colleagues and right honourable colleagues in the House

:32:45. > :32:55.as I've gone through. Can I speak a little bit to do with comments made

:32:56. > :33:01.by my honourable friend for Bromley? I think he was brutally honest when

:33:02. > :33:10.he said he would like to have done this when he was the Minister. And

:33:11. > :33:17.my other former colleague was the Minister and a firefighter. We must

:33:18. > :33:25.learn by mistakes, and we all make mistakes in life. It will not be an

:33:26. > :33:29.old boys' network. It will be based around Her Majesty 's Royal

:33:30. > :33:34.Constabulary. They will not have weeks to practice escape drills,

:33:35. > :33:45.like I remember vividly when I was in the job. Those were the old

:33:46. > :33:53.ladders and big wheels. They will have the powers to bring in experts

:33:54. > :34:00.fit for the inspections. I think that is important. I think the

:34:01. > :34:05.inspector should not be an ex-chief fire officer from somewhere, similar

:34:06. > :34:12.to what we had before. I know that will put a few ruffles in the

:34:13. > :34:21.network. The person coming in asking the question up of why can bring in

:34:22. > :34:29.expertise. At committee, this was raised. I had only been in the job

:34:30. > :34:34.two weeks when we started talking about this. It was a very new role.

:34:35. > :34:41.I knew what I wanted to be able to do. The Home Secretary knew. And a

:34:42. > :34:49.little bit of encouragement from the shadow minister has helped us on our

:34:50. > :34:53.way. There will be areas where we can work closer with Constabulary

:34:54. > :35:04.around the way they do their inspections. Can I speak also to

:35:05. > :35:09.some of the Government amendments which I haven't had the opportunity

:35:10. > :35:16.to talk about earlier? And also some of the excellent contributions

:35:17. > :35:21.during. One of the most important amendments or agreements I have

:35:22. > :35:25.agreed to with the Home Secretary's permission is around the 12 month

:35:26. > :35:33.rule for officers who have retired or left the force. It always struck

:35:34. > :35:39.me as strange long before I came into this that, criminal proceedings

:35:40. > :35:50.apart, there was an investigation within the police force, no matter

:35:51. > :35:55.what rank you work, and in some cases I have a duty of actually

:35:56. > :36:00.signing pension documents which actually revoke police officers'

:36:01. > :36:04.pensions, they have broken the rules so badly they lose their pension. I

:36:05. > :36:08.signed those quite regularly. It is very difficult when you're signing

:36:09. > :36:14.something which actually is going to really dramatically change their

:36:15. > :36:25.future. I do not do that lightly. I often quiz my officials and ask

:36:26. > :36:32.about it. The rules are quite specific. In this area, while we

:36:33. > :36:44.didn't want to leave... I know that Shadow Home Secretary understands.

:36:45. > :36:58.We did think is real opportunity on behalf of Hillsborough... I hope as

:36:59. > :37:01.indicated by the shadow front bench and other parties, they work with us

:37:02. > :37:06.on those regulations because they will be one of the biggest legacies.

:37:07. > :37:18.I'm sorry that in two areas we don't quite agree with the opposition. The

:37:19. > :37:21.area around Levenson two. And I am categorically not saying it is not

:37:22. > :37:37.going to happen but no decision will be made until after the... It is

:37:38. > :37:41.above my pay grade. I will give way. I am grateful to the Minister for

:37:42. > :37:45.giving way. I don't want to compete with the Scottish Nationalists in

:37:46. > :37:51.offering to be honest broker but could he say that when the cases are

:37:52. > :38:01.concluded the Government will reaffirm their commitment to go to

:38:02. > :38:08.level as in two. -- Leveson two. We will wait for the enquiries and

:38:09. > :38:19.proceedings to finish and then we will announce the situation. I am

:38:20. > :38:34.grateful. He made the position clear but in making it clear he wanted --

:38:35. > :38:38.want please... Can he be clear that the position he outlined as a

:38:39. > :38:45.weakening of the Government position? The Government promised a

:38:46. > :38:48.stage two. That is up in the area now. Can we be clear this is a

:38:49. > :38:54.weakening of the Government's position? There is no weakening our

:38:55. > :39:04.change. We will wait for the conclusions. We have, all the way

:39:05. > :39:13.through this, and I have to accept the shadow sick troop of state's

:39:14. > :39:17.view, but no Home Secretary has gone further further victims of

:39:18. > :39:21.Hillsborough than this one. We will wait till after the conclusion of

:39:22. > :39:31.the criminal cases. The other area on which we disagree I think is a

:39:32. > :39:34.shame but I also respect the view of others in the House and if we have

:39:35. > :39:42.to do go through the lobbies we will. A review is underway and we

:39:43. > :39:48.will not pre-empt what is said in the review. There are assumptions

:39:49. > :39:58.which will be in it, right and wrong. Whatever happens, it does not

:39:59. > :40:04.stop there. If we win in the division, we will still wait for the

:40:05. > :40:11.conclusions of the investigation and the court cases and we will still

:40:12. > :40:18.wait for Bishop James. I think I need to make a tiny bit of progress

:40:19. > :40:26.and then perhaps I will... I'll make it brief. Could I point out to him

:40:27. > :40:30.that the issue of parity, equality, legal funding at inquest with the

:40:31. > :40:33.police are represented goes beyond Hillsborough because it affects many

:40:34. > :40:41.families fighting many injustices so it is beyond the Bishop James work.

:40:42. > :40:44.Could we at least have a commitment to work with us to seek that parity

:40:45. > :40:50.and the quality of legal funding at inquest? If that commitment is

:40:51. > :40:55.given, that would mean something. All the way through we have worked

:40:56. > :41:00.with Her Majesty's opposition and we have done everything we can. I

:41:01. > :41:04.slightly disagree and this may be semantics but the work that Bishop

:41:05. > :41:07.James will do will make a huge difference for cases going forward

:41:08. > :41:13.because of the experiences of what these people have gone through for

:41:14. > :41:19.the last 27 years. It is not just about Hillsborough. Bishop James's

:41:20. > :41:22.review would get guidance to government, whatever colour that

:41:23. > :41:30.government is. That is why we wait for all the recommendations for

:41:31. > :41:37.the... From the review. I think on this particular one perhaps we can

:41:38. > :41:40.come to ground. We will continue to work together beyond this debate

:41:41. > :41:47.this afternoon, no matter what the faults are because it is the most

:41:48. > :41:54.important thing to be done. -- votes. Can I speak about the

:41:55. > :42:00.conclusions around mental health. The Foreign Minister and the member

:42:01. > :42:05.for North Durham and committee talked about this extensively. As a

:42:06. > :42:10.former disability is minister, I had long meetings are very fruitful

:42:11. > :42:17.meetings with the former mental health Minister in the Coalition

:42:18. > :42:23.Government, and we agreed about 90%. Many changes to the way the police

:42:24. > :42:26.are dealing and looking after people with mental health issues is because

:42:27. > :42:30.of the work the member for North Norfolk did in his time as a

:42:31. > :42:42.minister. He pushed the Department for health to places at times the

:42:43. > :42:45.did not want to go. There are things that are still fundamentally wrong

:42:46. > :42:51.in the 21st-century. As my honourable friend said earlier on,

:42:52. > :42:57.my heart tells me that the use of a Taser within a secure mental health

:42:58. > :43:01.facility must be wrong. But my brain and my experience tells me, in

:43:02. > :43:09.exceptional circumstances it must not be the norm but in exceptional

:43:10. > :43:13.circumstances... I have met several of the lobbyists who have campaigned

:43:14. > :43:24.hard on this and my colleague will take the work forward on this. I

:43:25. > :43:30.think we are in a wheelie exciting position that instead of the police

:43:31. > :43:35.being the place you went, and not just about mental health but social

:43:36. > :43:48.services as well, particularly to do with children, and I have been with

:43:49. > :43:55.police long before I got this role. The constables were given notes from

:43:56. > :43:58.the Sergeant, would we go and visit Mary or John because social services

:43:59. > :44:02.have said they haven't actually seen them for a couple of days and these

:44:03. > :44:08.are vulnerable people and you have a duty? Sorry, social services had

:44:09. > :44:16.that duty first. We must be the last resort. I use the word we because I

:44:17. > :44:21.am passionate. Police cannot be the first port of call. The work in the

:44:22. > :44:25.last couple of years to do with street triage particularly, and

:44:26. > :44:33.different ways this is done around the country, but Street triaged

:44:34. > :44:50.transformed the amount of 135 and 136 done. Can I touch on this? Went

:44:51. > :44:55.a 135 -- a 135136 is an arrest. It is not being sectioned, they are

:44:56. > :44:59.arrested. The power is to protect and arrest. That is something we

:45:00. > :45:06.need to make clear. In different parts of the country we have seen

:45:07. > :45:11.different uses of 135. They have massively dropped, particularly 136.

:45:12. > :45:16.That is because of work done but more needs to be done. We are in a

:45:17. > :45:21.position to drive this forward. Frankly, we have said enough is

:45:22. > :45:32.enough. I understand many of the amendments. Particularly on use of

:45:33. > :45:42.lasers. -- Tasers. They have saved lives but I understand the risks

:45:43. > :45:48.alluded to. I used to do voluntary work in a mental health hospital

:45:49. > :45:52.before and during the time I was in the Army because my mother worked as

:45:53. > :45:58.a mental health nurse. I asked, is there a case where you would have to

:45:59. > :46:02.use this sort of force? She is retired now. She said to me, sadly,

:46:03. > :46:08.in exceptional circumstances. She emphasised the quality of training

:46:09. > :46:13.within mental health facilities as to how you could restrain someone

:46:14. > :46:19.safely. I'm sure I heard him right but just to confirm, what he is

:46:20. > :46:23.saying is that ministers will work with interested parties, myself, the

:46:24. > :46:27.honourable gentleman for North Norfolk, to ensure the recording of

:46:28. > :46:31.these incidents is much better and the reporting is much better and we

:46:32. > :46:33.will be able to report the progress back to the House periodically,

:46:34. > :46:38.perhaps through letters in the library.

:46:39. > :46:44.I fight my honourable friend for that intervention but that is the

:46:45. > :46:48.point I was trying to get to. If we devolve these powers down we give

:46:49. > :46:52.more and more powers to the PCCs then they should really know what is

:46:53. > :46:55.going on in their part of the world and that should be there and

:46:56. > :47:00.available for the public, it should not be a pay, it should be there to

:47:01. > :47:04.be received. It will take more work and I am delegating more work to my

:47:05. > :47:13.colleagues on the Treasury bench at the moment. It is not just the Home

:47:14. > :47:15.Office. Someone said earlier on that this really should not be in the

:47:16. > :47:24.bill and actually probably should've been years ago but it needed to be

:47:25. > :47:32.in this bill. In the monitoring of the use of Tasers, ensure that we

:47:33. > :47:38.look at the ethnic dimension of on whom they are used and that it is

:47:39. > :47:42.publicly available, so there is transparency there. I think it is

:47:43. > :47:45.vitally important because one of the points that I know my colleagues

:47:46. > :47:53.have had in their discussions and one of the issues around when I was

:47:54. > :47:57.the disability Minister is the disproportionate experience of black

:47:58. > :48:00.men being Tasered in facilities and there was a disproportionately high

:48:01. > :48:03.number of black men in mental health facilities and we all know there is

:48:04. > :48:07.a disproportionately high prevalence of black men in prisons and the

:48:08. > :48:11.criminal justice system. It is not something we can just say, it is

:48:12. > :48:16.something we need to do something about. The educational standards and

:48:17. > :48:20.the aspirations and whether or not. The other issue that the right

:48:21. > :48:23.Honourable gentleman race which was rightly important is that where

:48:24. > :48:27.someone has been abused, whether it be sexual or in other ways, we

:48:28. > :48:31.should make sure we get the right care to them early on. Don't assume,

:48:32. > :48:39.of course, that it would show up in that first medical analysis. I know

:48:40. > :48:44.from friends with post-traumatic stress and I had friends for many

:48:45. > :48:50.years ago in the Falklands who are only showing those signs now. If he

:48:51. > :48:53.doesn't accept the memo that there should be an automatic referral and

:48:54. > :48:57.I absolutely accept that things made show up later on, will he accept, in

:48:58. > :49:00.accordance with what The Children's Society is saying, that the

:49:01. > :49:05.government should be very clear that it should be the standard process

:49:06. > :49:10.that a child is always referred to an assessment of their mental health

:49:11. > :49:16.needs? I am probably stepping way beyond my portfolio but as a father

:49:17. > :49:20.I really think that if you are assessing a child that has been

:49:21. > :49:23.abused, how can you not assess them for their mental health damage that

:49:24. > :49:26.may have been occurred? I think it is something that is a natural thing

:49:27. > :49:29.to do and I will probably get shot for that but probably at the end of

:49:30. > :49:34.the day and is a moral position that is where we need but how that is

:49:35. > :49:39.done is for the right honourable gentleman's former Department and it

:49:40. > :49:45.is something. Can I move, Mr Deputy Speaker, if I can, to the area

:49:46. > :49:54.around facial coverings. The particular part of the bill which

:49:55. > :49:58.was clause 23, my honourable friend from market harbour and several of

:49:59. > :50:07.his colleagues, I think we have come to a bit of a consensus about where

:50:08. > :50:11.to be on this. I arranged that the lead on this within the police and

:50:12. > :50:15.the whole country, and very unusually, really very unusually, a

:50:16. > :50:23.senior police officer said, don't give me any more powers., I am happy

:50:24. > :50:26.with the powers that we have got. What they said in the meetings that

:50:27. > :50:29.we had, and I are happy to share with the house, is that the way the

:50:30. > :50:35.legislation is being interpreted through guidance is an issue. I

:50:36. > :50:43.think there is also some confusion about the powers of under 68 a of

:50:44. > :50:46.the act which is written authority and the truth is that they go on to

:50:47. > :50:49.their radios and immediately say this is the situation and I want to

:50:50. > :50:53.remove it, I think an offence will take place and it is of it instantly

:50:54. > :50:57.given and it is signed later on and it is not breaking any law and it is

:50:58. > :51:01.exactly how the procedure works on a daily basis. However the Home

:51:02. > :51:08.Secretary and I both understand there is real concern as to whether

:51:09. > :51:12.or not it has been implemented in a way which has the confidence of the

:51:13. > :51:17.public as well as perhaps the police confidence. And rather than change

:51:18. > :51:25.the law against the advice that I am getting from the police, what we are

:51:26. > :51:28.going to propose to do is where we already have a pace a review coming

:51:29. > :51:33.forward, which doesn't happen very often, but we have it in this

:51:34. > :51:37.autumn, coming forward now with stop and search, and these powers are

:51:38. > :51:41.very similar when you think about them, to stop and search power, that

:51:42. > :51:47.we are going to ask through the review that these powers are added

:51:48. > :51:51.into that. That is, I think a very significant change and it alleviate

:51:52. > :51:59.some of the concerns but at the end of the day we need to make sure that

:52:00. > :52:02.we are giving the powers. Of course. I wouldn't want my right honourable

:52:03. > :52:05.friend to think I was I'm grateful for what he was suggesting, I would

:52:06. > :52:10.never do that or be that but it would not be very helpful if he were

:52:11. > :52:15.to be able to write to me setting out exactly what it is he is

:52:16. > :52:19.proposing and what are the likely amendments to Pace. He mentioned a

:52:20. > :52:23.review of Pace that he did not mention necessarily an amendment to

:52:24. > :52:28.the police and criminal evidence act so if he could be clearer in paper

:52:29. > :52:31.that would be very useful. I will write to the honourable gentleman

:52:32. > :52:36.and I will put a copy of the letter in the library of the house as well.

:52:37. > :52:42.There is a cross-party concern about some of these issues. This is

:52:43. > :52:46.specific to this regulation so I listened very carefully to my

:52:47. > :52:51.honourable friend and this is not part of the bill and as he said in

:52:52. > :52:55.his commentary it is for later. If he thinks I am fobbing it off into

:52:56. > :53:04.the long grass, the purpose of this Bill, that is exactly what I am

:53:05. > :53:08.doing. I think that the way that the debate has been dealt with today,

:53:09. > :53:12.some of the ways that I hope that both myself and my colleagues on the

:53:13. > :53:17.true committee and as we go into the true committee and as we go into the

:53:18. > :53:23.next group has helped this Bill progress in a way that has been

:53:24. > :53:30.positive. It is a long time since I have had the sort of encouragement

:53:31. > :53:35.in a bill, apart from one previous bill that I took a house with just a

:53:36. > :53:40.little bit of disagreement, but I am absolutely adamant that this bill,

:53:41. > :53:44.and amendments and new clauses and the patients in this Bill, will be a

:53:45. > :53:49.legacy for the Hillsborough families, and the campaign that they

:53:50. > :53:53.have brought forward for 27 years. I am sorry that we cannot agree on

:53:54. > :53:57.everything, as I have indicated, even if we disagree tonight, we will

:53:58. > :54:05.probably agree tomorrow, and with that in mind, Mr Deputy Speaker, I

:54:06. > :54:12.move these clauses. The question is that clause 28 the read a second

:54:13. > :54:17.time, as many of that opinion say I. The eyes have it. The question is

:54:18. > :54:33.should 48 be added to the bill? As many are of that opinion say Tasers

:54:34. > :54:43.three. The ayes have it. The question is that the government do

:54:44. > :54:50.schedule one and clause 30, as many of that say aye. The ayes have it.

:54:51. > :55:00.We now come to a new clause 60 three. The question is that new

:55:01. > :55:07.clause 63 be added to the bill, as many of that opinion say aye. The

:55:08. > :56:53.contrary, no. Division! Clear the lobbies!

:56:54. > :57:01.The question is... Sorry, new clause 60 three. An amendment to move the

:57:02. > :57:02.new clause formally. The question is that the amendment be added to the

:57:03. > :07:27.bill. Order. Order. The ayes to the right,

:07:28. > :07:39.155. The noes to the left, 264. Thank you. The eyes to the right,

:07:40. > :07:55.155. The noes to the left, 264. The noes habit. -- have it. We come to

:07:56. > :07:56.close 64. As many as are of the opinion, say "aye". To the contrary,

:07:57. > :09:20."no". Division. Clear the lobby. The question is that new clause

:09:21. > :09:21.64-bit added to the bill. As many as are of the opinion, say "aye". To

:09:22. > :18:41.the contrary, "no".. . Order! Order! The ayes to the right,

:18:42. > :18:51.155. The noes to the left, 268. Thank you. The ayes to write, 155.

:18:52. > :19:06.The noes to the left, 268. The noes have it. Unlock. Right... Let's have

:19:07. > :19:17.a look. Minister to move government amendment 25 to 32, 31 to 61. 83 and

:19:18. > :19:24.14 to 17 formally. The question is that government amendment is 22 to

:19:25. > :19:25.30, 31 to 61, 88, 63 to 84 and 14 to 17 be made.

:19:26. > :19:27.As many as are of that opinion, say "aye".

:19:28. > :19:44.The ayes have it. Minister to move a new clauses 49 to 53 and government

:19:45. > :19:49.new schedule two, formally. The question is that government new

:19:50. > :19:52.clauses 49 to 53 and government new schedule two be added to the bill.

:19:53. > :19:54.As many as are of that opinion, say "aye".

:19:55. > :20:16.Minister to move government amendments 89 to 106, 109, 110, 117

:20:17. > :20:20.and 18 formally. The question is that government amendments 89 to 16,

:20:21. > :20:25.109, 110, 117 and one 18. As many as are of that

:20:26. > :20:38.opinion, say "aye". We now continue clause two on page

:20:39. > :20:42.55 of the amendment paper with which it would be convenient to consider

:20:43. > :20:47.other clauses and amendments listed on the selection paper. I now call

:20:48. > :20:56.Liz Saville Roberts to move the new clause two. I rise to speak to new

:20:57. > :21:00.clauses two, three, four and five and 44. I would like to say at this

:21:01. > :21:09.point that I intend to test the opinion of this house and call for a

:21:10. > :21:12.division on new clause two. The other four clauses are probing

:21:13. > :21:17.amendments to test the discussions made in the committee. I noticed the

:21:18. > :21:21.proposals made by the minister in the sport of localism that I would

:21:22. > :21:24.caution you rip -- cautiously proposed reminded that Wales is one

:21:25. > :21:28.of the formations of the United Kingdom, yet it is the only one that

:21:29. > :21:36.has no responsibility for police forces. Second-class nation. The

:21:37. > :21:40.governments of other nations are able to direct their police forces

:21:41. > :21:45.to work effectively in response to their needs but Wales must follow

:21:46. > :21:50.the policing priorities of England. The four police forces of Wales are

:21:51. > :21:54.unique within the UK in that they are non-default bodies operating

:21:55. > :21:59.within a largely devolved public services landscape. They are thus

:22:00. > :22:03.required to respond to the agendas of two governments and serve the

:22:04. > :22:09.nation whose people have the right to use either the English all the

:22:10. > :22:20.Welsh languages. It should be noted that the Assembly Budget already

:22:21. > :22:26.funds 90 extra PCS owns does he, like me, find it surprising that

:22:27. > :22:34.many other services including mental health devolved and it prohibits the

:22:35. > :22:40.coherence of public service in Wales if this is devolved. It is the very

:22:41. > :22:45.fact being answerable to two agendas which is the reason why I understand

:22:46. > :22:50.our colleagues in the National Assembly of Wales and also the four

:22:51. > :22:55.police and Crime Commissioners in Wales are calling out for of

:22:56. > :23:02.policing. What we are describing now is in a stark contrast to the

:23:03. > :23:06.position in Wales where power over policing is due to be devolved to

:23:07. > :23:10.the English city regions like Manchester and Liverpool. The

:23:11. > :23:14.present approach to devolution considering this fact, comparing

:23:15. > :23:20.Wales with the English city reasons, the present approach to devolution

:23:21. > :23:24.has been criticised in the House of Lords constitutional committee

:23:25. > :23:28.report as piecemeal and lacking a coherent vision. I would strongly

:23:29. > :23:32.argue that the devolution of policing of Wales would benefit the

:23:33. > :23:36.people of Wales they are ill served by the antiquated England and were

:23:37. > :23:40.arrangement which inevitably is designed with the priorities of

:23:41. > :23:46.English cities in mind. Our demographics are different in Wales.

:23:47. > :23:49.The need to maintain effective services in rural areas with

:23:50. > :23:57.scattered populations cries out for better consideration. The impact of

:23:58. > :24:01.tourism, where populations rocket and bank holidays and summer months

:24:02. > :24:06.stretches resources to the limit. One area in my constituency has a

:24:07. > :24:11.1000 year-round residents and yet North Wales Police have to deal with

:24:12. > :24:16.an influx of 20,000 visitors in the summer season. I went on patrol with

:24:17. > :24:19.officers last August and saw how drunken behaviour meant police

:24:20. > :24:22.officers have to focus behaviour -- attention on that one community,

:24:23. > :24:27.travelling hours back and forth along custody -- country rich to the

:24:28. > :24:31.nearest custody cells 20 miles away. The current arrangement of policing

:24:32. > :24:34.in England and where is dominated by English metropolitan concerns and

:24:35. > :24:41.fails to provide for the needs of Wales. I will give way. I am

:24:42. > :24:44.grateful to my honourable friend for giving way and the strong points she

:24:45. > :24:47.is making. Recently the UK Government brought forward a

:24:48. > :24:50.centralised service for helicopter services for police services in

:24:51. > :24:54.England and Wales. It didn't affect Scotland and Northern Ireland

:24:55. > :24:59.because there forces are decentralised. We lost our

:25:00. > :25:02.helicopter. The front bench in the government are smirking and this

:25:03. > :25:07.affects lives in my constituency. The police force in Dyfed Powys

:25:08. > :25:14.called out the helicopter over 40 occasions and only a handful of

:25:15. > :25:20.times the police came out. Order! Order!. Mr Edwards, this is if you

:25:21. > :25:23.wanted to speak you can speak that you cannot get carried away and

:25:24. > :25:31.speak to the Minister in that way. Keep it calm and any points you want

:25:32. > :25:34.to race there will be time to do so. The question of resources and how

:25:35. > :25:38.priorities direct them highlights again the fact that Wales has

:25:39. > :25:41.different needs and those resources from central government do get

:25:42. > :25:47.directed into those priorities which best serve England. When devolution

:25:48. > :25:51.of policing of Wales was discussed at committee the minister referred

:25:52. > :25:54.to the Silk Commission in England and Wales which was established by

:25:55. > :26:00.his party as a minister was him at the time, in 2011, with cross-party

:26:01. > :26:04.membership. Part two was published in 2014 and recommended devolution.

:26:05. > :26:09.He made much at the time of the fact that there was no consensus on this

:26:10. > :26:13.recommendation as a result of the St David's Day process and powers for a

:26:14. > :26:26.purpose. Those involved in the process said it was little more than

:26:27. > :26:29.a tick box exercise. If all-party representatives liked it, the power

:26:30. > :26:31.was in the bag and if not, check it out, regardless of the implications

:26:32. > :26:33.for the government and needs and indeed people of Wales. I know that

:26:34. > :26:36.at committee labour indicated a grudging support for devolving

:26:37. > :26:41.policing, although in the distant future, ten years away. It seems

:26:42. > :26:44.pressure from Plaid Cymru is driving the accelerator. This is not a

:26:45. > :26:50.matter of jam tomorrow, we are living in hope of this today. This

:26:51. > :26:54.opportunity is before the house here and now and the contents of future

:26:55. > :26:58.legislation and future amendments lack this certainty. If this house

:26:59. > :27:02.votes for devolution today policing will be devolved to Wales and the

:27:03. > :27:16.government will then have to amend the Wales Bill

:27:17. > :27:19.accordingly, at the very start of its journey. Indeed, surely the

:27:20. > :27:21.Wales Bill deals first and foremost with constitutional matters, but

:27:22. > :27:24.here is our opportunity to make sure. I urge Labour to grasp the

:27:25. > :27:26.opportunity and support the National Assembly of Wales and all four

:27:27. > :27:28.Police and Crime Commissioners in Wales and support the devolution of

:27:29. > :27:31.policing today. I turn now to new clauses three and four and five,

:27:32. > :27:35.which relate to aspects of digital crime. I would know that these, and

:27:36. > :27:39.new clause 44, are probing amendments. The government states

:27:40. > :27:43.that resources are already provided to counter digital crime in the form

:27:44. > :27:48.of the national cyber unit. I would respond that the national side unit

:27:49. > :27:51.is relatively small and that the national cyber Security programme

:27:52. > :27:55.concentrates primarily on the security businesses and

:27:56. > :28:00.infrastructure. Action fraud addresses crime in relation to

:28:01. > :28:04.online fraud and the priorities here our business, financial and serious

:28:05. > :28:12.crime and it do not cover the safeguarding of victims of abuse

:28:13. > :28:14.crimes, such as domestic violence, stalking, harassment or hate crime.

:28:15. > :28:21.The first of these clauses proposes a review of legislation relating to

:28:22. > :28:26.digital crime and incorporate many acts into a single statute. Criminal

:28:27. > :28:31.justice professionals, including the police and the CPS believe it is

:28:32. > :28:34.confusing at best and overwhelming at worst. Victims complaints are

:28:35. > :28:38.sometimes subject to delay and there are times when officers are

:28:39. > :28:43.uncertain whether a specific activity is criminal or not. The law

:28:44. > :28:48.has developed incrementally as technology advances and there is an

:28:49. > :28:52.urgent need to codify and clarify the current situation. Consolidation

:28:53. > :28:56.will save police time and money and it will avoid duplication of

:28:57. > :29:02.officers on cases. Swift action on victims complaints will reduce

:29:03. > :29:06.stress and anxiety to those victims. As regards new clause four,

:29:07. > :29:11.surveillance and monitoring highlights further issues against

:29:12. > :29:15.which there is presently no address. The identification of these actions

:29:16. > :29:18.as offences will enable the police to counter activities which are

:29:19. > :29:21.evidently related to surveillance with attention to cause distress and

:29:22. > :29:27.the law should respond appropriately. New clause five

:29:28. > :29:33.addresses the need for training that is fit for purpose. Even in large

:29:34. > :29:36.police areas fewer than 5% of police officers and staff, including call

:29:37. > :29:40.and first response personnel are trained in cyber crime. Victims

:29:41. > :29:45.report being advised to go off-line and not use social media by

:29:46. > :29:48.officers. This defies modern communication media and is

:29:49. > :29:51.equivalent to telling victims of harassment not to venture outside

:29:52. > :29:56.their own homes. The Home Office believes that training is a matter

:29:57. > :30:04.for individual forces, but in the absence of strong central leadership

:30:05. > :30:07.it can only perpetuate present inconsistencies and variations from

:30:08. > :30:12.force to force. National training would help to raise the status of

:30:13. > :30:16.victims. Finally I would like to turn to new clause 44, which calls

:30:17. > :30:19.for the establishment of a specialist digital unit to

:30:20. > :30:26.investigate online offences against children and young people. As I

:30:27. > :30:29.mentioned earlier there was a real risk intrinsic independency of

:30:30. > :30:33.central units, although I acknowledge the work done by the

:30:34. > :30:36.Child exploitation Centre. Once again children's charities report to

:30:37. > :30:41.us that the scale of abuse of children online, in terms of

:30:42. > :30:45.offenders, devices and images, is leaving police swamped. There are

:30:46. > :30:50.delays in forensic analysis devices, delays in some cases of up to 12

:30:51. > :30:55.months. These delays pose a risk to the safeguarding of children. At

:30:56. > :31:00.committee the Minister mentioned the child abuse image database and

:31:01. > :31:04.praised the accuracy of imagery interpretation and how it aids

:31:05. > :31:06.identification. It is to be commended that the database will

:31:07. > :31:11.take some of the load from individual forces.

:31:12. > :31:20.I would argue there is a precedent for digital units on a par with

:31:21. > :31:29.domestic violence units. I will give way. I commend her on tabling these

:31:30. > :31:33.amendments. She talked about the idea of a specialist digital unit

:31:34. > :31:38.within each police force. Does she agree that it would be imperative if

:31:39. > :31:41.that were to happen that this would feedback to some central database to

:31:42. > :31:48.ensure the work done in those individual units was available

:31:49. > :31:57.across the country? We need the expertise of its central unit

:31:58. > :32:08.alongside. And we avoid the risk that a central unit's existence

:32:09. > :32:13.tends to encourage crimes to be seen as another's departments problem.

:32:14. > :32:19.Those amendments I chose to discuss and I would reiterate those are

:32:20. > :32:29.probing amendments. I would repeat my intention to push for a division

:32:30. > :32:34.on new clause two. New clause two, devolution and responsibility for

:32:35. > :32:44.policing. The question is that new clause two be read a second time. I

:32:45. > :32:51.rise to speak on new clauses three, four, five... I note she set her

:32:52. > :33:01.amendments out as probing amendments. Those five amendments

:33:02. > :33:07.tabled by Lib Dem and Plaid Cymru members. We all need to get our

:33:08. > :33:12.government and governments around the world to wake up to the extent

:33:13. > :33:18.to which crime and criminal activity has now moved online. All laws are

:33:19. > :33:23.not giving victims the protection they need and our police forces face

:33:24. > :33:29.a revolution if they are to tackle the crime that they face now

:33:30. > :33:33.effectively in the future. There has been a significant shift in the way

:33:34. > :33:39.people experience harm in this world. New clause 44 as the

:33:40. > :33:43.honourable lady already set out calls for police to have special

:33:44. > :33:48.digital units to look particularly at child abuse images. Many police

:33:49. > :33:52.forces in this country have gone a long way, including my own in

:33:53. > :33:57.Hampshire, to build up this sort of specialist expertise but I think the

:33:58. > :34:01.new clause in itself is an interesting piece of advice which I

:34:02. > :34:06.will be interested to hear the Minister's response to as well as

:34:07. > :34:11.the response from police training too. There are serious questions as

:34:12. > :34:17.to whether the providers of online space are doing what they need to do

:34:18. > :34:21.also keep their communities safe. They have not only a corporate

:34:22. > :34:30.social responsibility to do that but I also think an economic imperative

:34:31. > :34:34.because it is their brand names which are tarnished when their

:34:35. > :34:38.products are used for illegal purposes. I think there is another

:34:39. > :34:46.aspect, not particularly brought up in the amendments today but I will

:34:47. > :34:50.also mention the importance and international importations of these

:34:51. > :34:54.things. If we want a solution to the sorts of crimes committed online in

:34:55. > :35:04.this new digital world which does not respect county boundaries, we

:35:05. > :35:14.must have some by end -- buying in from international communities two.

:35:15. > :35:19.Perhaps we could look to the United Nations or the youth part of the

:35:20. > :35:23.United Nations to look at how we can get more effective laws in future

:35:24. > :35:29.that are not constricted by international boundaries. Our law is

:35:30. > :35:33.struggling to cope. These amendments recognise that there is a real need

:35:34. > :35:39.to recognise online crime is different. I think it is a battle

:35:40. > :35:45.that has been won when this government put in place the revenge

:35:46. > :35:50.pornography law a year or so ago. We have already seen thousands of

:35:51. > :35:54.people using the helpline and thousands of reports to police. Two

:35:55. > :35:57.thirds of cases reported to the police have seen no action because

:35:58. > :36:01.of Rob Holmes with evidence that victims have been able to give or

:36:02. > :36:05.even victims have withdrawn. These new clauses are picking up those

:36:06. > :36:11.issues and calling for the Government to consider again. New

:36:12. > :36:15.clause 46 calls for anonymity of victims, something considered at the

:36:16. > :36:20.time the law was put in place. The advice at that point was to wait and

:36:21. > :36:27.see how things progress. Statistics suggest now is a time to think

:36:28. > :36:41.again. The myriad of amendments here today show the level of complexity

:36:42. > :36:46.and concern across all parties. My concern is that the offer a

:36:47. > :36:52.piecemeal set of solutions. The honourable lady picked up on that.

:36:53. > :36:58.Surely what is needed is a wholesale review of the police training and

:36:59. > :37:00.development of international support for digital providers to take

:37:01. > :37:05.seriously the importance of keeping their communities safe online. I

:37:06. > :37:08.support the spirit of these amendments but I am struck by the

:37:09. > :37:15.need for a more comprehensive review. Perhaps in the form of the

:37:16. > :37:24.Digital economy Bill which Her Majesty announced in the speech last

:37:25. > :37:30.month... I'm grateful. She articulates a serious problem but

:37:31. > :37:34.does she also acknowledge that with some 70,000 cases of historic child

:37:35. > :37:38.abuse likely to be investigated by the police this year alone, with up

:37:39. > :37:45.to half of cases coming to the courts involving sexual explication,

:37:46. > :37:49.many of them historic, police are overwhelmed in their capacity to

:37:50. > :37:55.deal with this new wave of digital crime against some of the most

:37:56. > :38:01.vulnerable children? So the suggestion for an overview of this

:38:02. > :38:06.is essential. He has an impeccable record of campaigning in this area.

:38:07. > :38:10.What I would say to him is that perhaps the very nature of the scale

:38:11. > :38:20.of this problem as an indication we do not have the regulatory framework

:38:21. > :38:24.with -- within which to work for the future. We can't expect the police

:38:25. > :38:29.force to put down the work they do in every other area to solely focus

:38:30. > :38:34.on online crime. But at the moment he is right to say that the scale

:38:35. > :38:43.that is seen as, in the words of some Chiefs of police, frightening.

:38:44. > :38:49.We are not yet seeing a response to that and I hope the Digital economy

:38:50. > :38:56.Bill will provide ministers on the French ten -- on the front bench

:38:57. > :39:00.today... We can no longer say this is the by-product of a new industry

:39:01. > :39:06.which will settle down over time. I think the honourable members will

:39:07. > :39:10.have heard quite a good deal of evidence this evening to suggest

:39:11. > :39:21.more action must be taken and I would ask ministers to agree to sit

:39:22. > :39:24.down with me and other honourable members who might be interested to

:39:25. > :39:28.set out how the Digital economy act can be used as a vehicle to achieve

:39:29. > :39:36.the objective of making the Internet safer at home and abroad. I just

:39:37. > :39:46.want to say a few words in relation to new clause 13 and 14. New clause

:39:47. > :39:50.13 would make it an offence for adults to groom children and young

:39:51. > :39:53.people for criminal behaviour. New clause 14 would introduce a new

:39:54. > :40:07.grooming for criminal behaviour prevention order which I would call

:40:08. > :40:13.a Fagin order. We must recognise young people drawn into banality and

:40:14. > :40:19.good often been groomed and manipulated. Currently we have

:40:20. > :40:27.numerous prevention orders to combat grooming. Sexual risk orders, sexual

:40:28. > :40:31.harm prevention orders, child abduction warning notices. A bit

:40:32. > :40:34.like to see the creation of a similar order to be used when

:40:35. > :40:40.children are groomed by organise crime to act as drug runners. This

:40:41. > :40:43.would be a practical way of disrupting activities including the

:40:44. > :40:50.phenomenon of county lines in which cases criminals groom and question

:40:51. > :40:55.people into selling Class A drugs many miles from home. Organised

:40:56. > :40:59.crime is aggressively creating new markets for drugs in every seaside

:41:00. > :41:05.town and every small country village across the country. Criminals used

:41:06. > :41:09.to do their own drug running but now they are actively identifying groups

:41:10. > :41:14.of vulnerable children including those living in children's homes and

:41:15. > :41:20.pupil referral units to use and so minimise the risk to themselves.

:41:21. > :41:27.County lines is the next big grooming scandal and the horizon. It

:41:28. > :41:32.takes many forms but it's paces is using vulnerable children to develop

:41:33. > :41:37.new markets for drugs. One example so a 15-year-old girl offered ?500

:41:38. > :41:48.to go upcountry to sell drugs. She had Class A drugs planted inside but

:41:49. > :41:57.was set up by the original gang and assaulted and had the drugs forcibly

:41:58. > :42:01.removed. The threat of child sexual explication for girls in gangs is

:42:02. > :42:05.known but the added factor of being trafficked to remote locations

:42:06. > :42:10.compounds their vulnerability. These young people are at risk of

:42:11. > :42:15.physical, sexual violence and emotional and physical abuse. That

:42:16. > :42:19.model of grooming involves both trafficking and modern slavery.

:42:20. > :42:23.Children from greater Manchester are being groomed by criminal gangs and

:42:24. > :42:30.have been found selling drugs as far away as Devon. These gang members

:42:31. > :42:36.are like modern-day Fagins, hard men who groom youngsters to get them to

:42:37. > :42:44.do their dirty work. They must be stopped in their tracks. Are some

:42:45. > :42:46.reports said younger ones are often groomed for involvement in criminal

:42:47. > :42:51.behaviour and harmful sexual behaviour as part of gang culture.

:42:52. > :42:54.The most recent Rotherham trial showed a connection between

:42:55. > :42:58.organised crime and drugs and child sexual exploitation. I read the

:42:59. > :43:09.recent Home Office report and also the NCA report into county lines. I

:43:10. > :43:14.think this development is not fully understood or recognised. Someone

:43:15. > :43:19.needs to take ownership of a strategy to disrupt this aggressive

:43:20. > :43:25.organised network and the strategy needs to put the safeguarding of

:43:26. > :43:28.children first. I don't pretend that Fagin orders would be a silver

:43:29. > :43:33.bullet but they would indicate a change in culture and a recognition

:43:34. > :43:37.that the responsibility lies with the adults who groom their children.

:43:38. > :43:41.We can't afford to make the same mistakes as we did with child sexual

:43:42. > :43:45.explication when we let terrible things happen to children because we

:43:46. > :43:51.blamed them for bringing about their own exploitation. Child sexual

:43:52. > :43:55.exploitation, drug running and involvement with criminal activity

:43:56. > :43:59.are often intertwined which is why we need a two pronged approach. We

:44:00. > :44:05.should have similar prevention orders for adults grooming children

:44:06. > :44:10.for criminal behaviour. We must have a response to county lines which

:44:11. > :44:13.ensures children are found, safeguarded and supported out of

:44:14. > :44:16.gangs and that adults are stopped as early as possible from grooming and

:44:17. > :44:20.manipulating children and are varnished to the full extent of the

:44:21. > :44:25.law for their exploitation. Until then, it will continue to be the

:44:26. > :44:30.young victims who are exploited, blamed and punished as their abusers

:44:31. > :44:34.and puppet masters continue with a trade which nets organised crime

:44:35. > :44:41.millions of pounds per year. I am grateful. I stand to speak in

:44:42. > :44:52.support of new clauses 15, 16 and 18, which stand in mine and others'

:44:53. > :44:56.names. I want to add my voice to the honourable ladies. It is clear from

:44:57. > :44:58.the amendments in this legislation and elsewhere that the law is

:44:59. > :45:05.struggling with protecting children online. It is old, ineffective, it

:45:06. > :45:10.does not appreciate the dangers out there for children on the Internet.

:45:11. > :45:16.I sincerely hope that the right honourable member is right that the

:45:17. > :45:21.Digital economy Bill is used to increase the protection for Jordan

:45:22. > :45:26.online. Not least because part of the reason that we do not tackle

:45:27. > :45:31.this problem in the way that we should is because there is big money

:45:32. > :45:35.to be made here. This is a commercial enterprise, pumping this

:45:36. > :45:39.stuff into people's screens and computers across the country, if not

:45:40. > :45:44.the world. So there is a certain slot and idleness in the digital

:45:45. > :45:49.community in dealing with it. Technically we could switch this

:45:50. > :45:52.stuff off tonight. We have no problem stopping children getting

:45:53. > :45:58.into our bank accounts, stopping children from buying things on

:45:59. > :46:03.Amazon or whatever it might be. Yet children can easily access

:46:04. > :46:05.pornography, now, every day, 24 hours a day without any protection

:46:06. > :46:11.whatsoever, unless your parents intervene. That is a disgraceful

:46:12. > :46:15.state of affairs. From my point of view, we should use the digital

:46:16. > :46:21.economy point of view to create some kind of offence of living from

:46:22. > :46:24.immoral earnings for these Internet providers because that is what they

:46:25. > :46:30.are doing by turning a blind eye and not interrogating data coming

:46:31. > :46:34.through their pipes that is of that nature and effectively turning it

:46:35. > :46:39.off so that eyes below 18 cannot see it.

:46:40. > :46:48.We need to find some way to make them face up to their obligations. I

:46:49. > :46:52.have three children, two of whom are very small, and I feel as if I am in

:46:53. > :46:59.a daily fight for them with the media, whether it is TV, online. We

:47:00. > :47:03.ration carefully what they get and what they can seek and I hope to god

:47:04. > :47:08.that as they grow and become teenagers, I can protect them from

:47:09. > :47:11.the worst, but I need help from the government and those who control

:47:12. > :47:17.data and our access to the Internet. They can do it in any number of ways

:47:18. > :47:21.and should be forced to do it on pain of significant financial

:47:22. > :47:24.penalties. It is only when profits are threatened that they will

:47:25. > :47:32.finally focus and come up with the technical solutions we need. I would

:47:33. > :47:38.have liked to have added my name. I was out with a group of people

:47:39. > :47:45.recently and we went on stings the local newsagents and others buying

:47:46. > :47:49.illegal counterfeit discounted cigarettes, in many cases advertised

:47:50. > :47:56.by a phone number which we rang up. It could only have resulted in

:47:57. > :48:00.criminal activity. Just as he is making the case for prostitution

:48:01. > :48:05.which clearly can only lead to illegal activity, it is so easy for

:48:06. > :48:09.us to be able to use this phone numbers and those telephone

:48:10. > :48:14.companies should be taking greater responsibility. He brings me neatly

:48:15. > :48:22.on the new clause 16, which deals exactly with this. I know you have

:48:23. > :48:29.been an aficionado of my political career so you will know that 15

:48:30. > :48:35.years ago, I was charged with getting rid of prostitutes's carton

:48:36. > :48:39.telephone boxes. It was costing Westminster Council ?250,000 a year

:48:40. > :48:48.to remove these things. We tried clearing them out, we tried putting

:48:49. > :48:52.up force cards so people were misdirected. In the end, the only

:48:53. > :49:00.solution we could come up with that we felt could work was barring the

:49:01. > :49:06.numbers. I went to see all the mobile companies and then people had

:49:07. > :49:10.landlines in those days. I said, what we want to do is when we notify

:49:11. > :49:18.you of this number, we would like you to bar it. They said, we will

:49:19. > :49:23.not do that. But we will, if you manage to get the placing of the

:49:24. > :49:28.cards made an offence, if you get it made illegal. They thought I had

:49:29. > :49:33.given up at that stage, there would be too much of a mountain to climb,

:49:34. > :49:39.but we decided to have a go and so on skewed a two year campaign.

:49:40. > :49:45.During those two years, I learned the truth about prostitutes's cards

:49:46. > :49:49.which is this is effectively organised crime being allowed to

:49:50. > :49:54.advertise for free and unrestricted on our streets and in the back of

:49:55. > :49:58.our newspapers and online. When you get one of these numbers, you are

:49:59. > :50:04.not ringing a prostitute who is herself a victim. You are ringing a

:50:05. > :50:11.switchboard. You ask what you want and they will give you any menu of

:50:12. > :50:18.women, trafficked or otherwise, of all ages and creeds and races. And

:50:19. > :50:21.then, those numbers gather value because once you are a punter and

:50:22. > :50:27.you have used the number and got what you want, you will use again

:50:28. > :50:30.and again and again. I started to learn and understand the economic

:50:31. > :50:36.spotlight these telephone numbers and that is key about eradicating

:50:37. > :50:40.it. Once you realise these numbers carry a value, it becomes even more

:50:41. > :50:45.pressing that we should bargain. When you add to that the printing of

:50:46. > :50:50.the cards, the advertising, the websites also costs money when the

:50:51. > :50:56.cards are printed in their hundreds of thousands, you can see why making

:50:57. > :50:59.it dangerous to advertise a telephone number could become an

:51:00. > :51:05.extremely effective deterrent to doing so. Once there is a number, if

:51:06. > :51:15.it is advertising is barred within 24 hours, they lose all of that

:51:16. > :51:21.income. So during those two years... For clarity, behind every one of

:51:22. > :51:24.those numbers is a woman who very often for the ones I have met has

:51:25. > :51:31.been abused as a child, might have been trafficked into the country,

:51:32. > :51:35.will have a violent pimp, so is the honourable member looking to

:51:36. > :51:42.prosecute the woman who is usually the victim or is he actually going

:51:43. > :51:48.after the pimps, manipulators and gang leaders behind? No, not

:51:49. > :51:52.targeting the women at all, this is about the organised crime which is

:51:53. > :51:57.creating the number, printing the card, placing the card and

:51:58. > :52:01.victimising the woman. It's about cutting off their access to cash,

:52:02. > :52:06.money, and therefore restricting their ability to build a business

:52:07. > :52:11.off the back of this free advertising. So eventually, after a

:52:12. > :52:19.two-year campaign, we got the offence made illegal helped by

:52:20. > :52:23.friends in the House of Lords. We arrested the first card, an Italian

:52:24. > :52:28.law student who was bailed and disappeared back to Italy. The next

:52:29. > :52:32.week, I had a meeting with the mobile phone companies and they

:52:33. > :52:36.completely welshed on the deal. They did not realise we would get it

:52:37. > :52:46.done, that I have the gumption we would manage. Usually the term

:52:47. > :52:52.welshing is deeply disrespectful to the people of my country. That was

:52:53. > :52:55.an unfortunate use of the word. There is a different spelling the B1

:52:56. > :53:02.but you are right. Please forgive me. It is a word in common parlance

:53:03. > :53:08.but I should not have used it. Anyway, they remained on the deal.

:53:09. > :53:10.As a result, I have been waiting for the opportunity to put the

:53:11. > :53:18.government the idea that there is this solution to the problem. So I

:53:19. > :53:23.present here a simple solution which is if a chief officer of police

:53:24. > :53:26.finds a number advertised in their area, for the purposes of

:53:27. > :53:30.prostitution, they can apply to a magistrate at the number barred.

:53:31. > :53:33.That means that both the police officer and the magistrates had to

:53:34. > :53:39.make a judgment about whether this is a measured thing to do. It's not

:53:40. > :53:46.automatic, is for the police to decide and I would advise the police

:53:47. > :53:50.officer to warn the owner. I would guarantee you that it will result in

:53:51. > :53:56.the disappearance of these cards from Liverpool, Manchester, the West

:53:57. > :53:59.End, where ever they may be. The right honourable gentleman is

:54:00. > :54:04.absolutely right, it could be extended, there could be numbers

:54:05. > :54:07.used for dealing drugs or selling cigarettes, numbers advertised on

:54:08. > :54:12.the Internet for prostitution and drugs, quite freely at the moment

:54:13. > :54:15.for people to access. If we cut the numbers do it swiftly, we will

:54:16. > :54:19.certainly go a huge rate in suppressing the activity making it

:54:20. > :54:25.difficult for criminal and customer to connect. I laid out before the

:54:26. > :54:28.House. I would ask the government, the Minister has said she will look

:54:29. > :54:34.at it and hopefully will come back in the Lords. My other two

:54:35. > :54:39.amendments, you will have noticed a theme in my time of this House, the

:54:40. > :54:43.protection of children. It has alarmed me for some time that the

:54:44. > :54:51.legislation protecting children is elderly and out of date and very

:54:52. > :54:56.patchy. The offence of child cruelty dates back to the 1932 act. It still

:54:57. > :55:01.includes things like allowing a child to be burnt, which arises from

:55:02. > :55:06.when we used to send them up chimneys. It is elderly are not fit

:55:07. > :55:11.for purpose. The last time the sentence was looked at was 1988. We

:55:12. > :55:15.have not looked at it for nearly 30 years and yet the number of offences

:55:16. > :55:20.is rising significantly. The deterrent effect is not working. I

:55:21. > :55:23.am given to understand that the sentencing council will look and

:55:24. > :55:29.review child cruelty over the coming summer. If they do so, we are duty

:55:30. > :55:35.bound to give head room and move the tariff up from ten years to 14 for

:55:36. > :55:43.the most severe offences. And then, new clause 15, which is about

:55:44. > :55:49.reviewing all child offences. We have been very good in this House in

:55:50. > :55:52.seeking to protect vulnerable groups in legislation generally so if you

:55:53. > :55:56.commit a crime against somebody who is gay because they are gay, you

:55:57. > :56:00.will get an aggravated sentence, if you get commit a crime against

:56:01. > :56:04.someone who is black because they are black, similarly you will get an

:56:05. > :56:11.aggravated sentence. Even on religious grounds, you will get an

:56:12. > :56:15.aggravated sentence, get if you commit an act on a child because

:56:16. > :56:19.they are a child, you will not necessarily get an aggregated

:56:20. > :56:25.sentence. They are not a protected group in law and they should be. I

:56:26. > :56:28.am grateful to the public bill office in helping me to draft an

:56:29. > :56:32.amendment that would allow me to do that and the best way we could find

:56:33. > :56:36.to do it was to require the sentencing council to review all

:56:37. > :56:40.offences for children within a 12 month period to allow all of us to

:56:41. > :56:44.have our say about aggravating the sentences when offences are

:56:45. > :56:50.committed against children. I have attempted to insert this principle,

:56:51. > :56:55.principally the psychoactive substances bill but the government

:56:56. > :57:00.would not accept my amendment if you are to sell a psychoactive substance

:57:01. > :57:07.to a child, you would get a stiffer sentence than if you sold it to 55

:57:08. > :57:11.man. All my amendments are probing. I am willing to give the government

:57:12. > :57:16.time to look at them again and hopefully they will come back in the

:57:17. > :57:21.Lords but if they don't, pleasingly, we get a policing and crime Bill in

:57:22. > :57:26.this House every six months, so I will get another chance, but on that

:57:27. > :57:36.basis, I hope you will look at the amendments and given the thumbs up

:57:37. > :57:41.for future consideration at least. I rise to speak predominantly the new

:57:42. > :57:45.clauses six, ten, 41 and 60 there had been tabled by the opposition

:57:46. > :57:49.front bench. The intention of these new clauses is to provide stronger

:57:50. > :57:53.safeguards against the sexual exploitation and abuse of children

:57:54. > :57:56.and to disrupt perpetrators of these crimes before they have the

:57:57. > :58:02.opportunity to destroy a child's life. I want to start with new

:58:03. > :58:05.clause six which relates to the extension of child abduction

:58:06. > :58:12.notices. These are a vital tool for the police. Quads are issued by the

:58:13. > :58:16.police at the request of a parent or legal guardian. They disrupt contact

:58:17. > :58:20.between a child and adult believed to be in the process of grooming

:58:21. > :58:25.batch child for sex. Currently the Police Commissioner one in relation

:58:26. > :58:31.to any child under the age of 16 but only a tiny minority. These include

:58:32. > :58:36.children taken into care under section 31, those subjected to an

:58:37. > :58:42.emergency protection order or in police protection. All other 17 and

:58:43. > :58:48.16-year-olds are left unprotected. By definition, children in care are

:58:49. > :58:52.vulnerable. The last statistics available showed 4300 and 2016 and

:58:53. > :58:57.17-year-olds who became looked after by the local authority would not be

:58:58. > :59:01.eligible for the protection of a child abduction warning notice. The

:59:02. > :59:06.Minister previously expressed scepticism around the proposals to

:59:07. > :59:09.extend the use of these notices. I recognise the sensitivities and law

:59:10. > :59:15.in this area given that 16 and 17-year-olds are illegal able to

:59:16. > :59:20.marry and consent to sexual activity but this group of children are

:59:21. > :59:25.living unstable and risky lives and they face a significantly greater

:59:26. > :59:28.risk of sexual exploitation and are targeted by adults who exploit their

:59:29. > :59:32.vulnerability yet currently police are denied access to a critical

:59:33. > :59:38.intervention tool that would help keep them safe. I agree with the

:59:39. > :59:42.Minister that quorum is at an imperfect tool but we also both

:59:43. > :59:47.agree that children of any age, including those who are 16 and 17,

:59:48. > :59:51.must be able to rely on the State for protection. For three years, I

:59:52. > :59:56.have been pushing the subsequent ministers to find a solution to this

:59:57. > :00:05.issue. The way to deal with complex issues is not to avoid them

:00:06. > :00:09.altogether. We need to persevere and collaborate so we can find the best

:00:10. > :00:13.possible solutions. It's vital that we get legislation to protect all

:00:14. > :00:17.children from abuse at the age of 18 and it's important that we get the

:00:18. > :00:21.legislation right. I know that the Minister is not minded to support

:00:22. > :00:24.this new clause so what assurances can she give that the government

:00:25. > :00:30.plans to make sure children up to the age of 18 are protected from the

:00:31. > :00:35.early stages of sexual grooming? Next, I would like to turn my

:00:36. > :00:39.attention to new clause 60. Unlike the previous amendment, this relates

:00:40. > :00:43.to an existing use of child abduction warning notices by the

:00:44. > :00:48.police. Phones are not legally enforceable. Breaching a notice is

:00:49. > :00:52.not a criminal offence but does form an evidence base for future action.

:00:53. > :00:57.That action is meant to take the form of a sexual harm prevention

:00:58. > :01:02.order or sexual risk order both of which require a high threshold to

:01:03. > :01:06.use. They are legally enforceable and punishable criminal sanctions.

:01:07. > :01:09.In theory, this is a good system. It allows the police to formally

:01:10. > :01:13.intervene to prevent harm at the earliest possible stage where there

:01:14. > :01:18.are concerns about an adult's behaviour towards a child. Even

:01:19. > :01:24.where the evidence is sparse, police have the ability to take further

:01:25. > :01:29.action. The police currently have tools to excavate their response and

:01:30. > :01:32.continue to keep a child safe. The problem is police forces in England

:01:33. > :01:37.and Wales are failing to record the breach of a child abduction warning

:01:38. > :01:41.notice. They are failing to record the issuing of a notice in the first

:01:42. > :01:46.place and the actions that follow from that breach. To be clear, if

:01:47. > :01:49.Acorn is issued because police suspect the child is at risk of

:01:50. > :01:54.grooming and this has the is not need reminding of the horrifying

:01:55. > :01:57.results of that crime, it's vital a breach is recorded and acted upon in

:01:58. > :02:09.order to keep that child safe from sexual abuse and exploitation.

:02:10. > :02:13.And yet, individual police forces have no idea to their effectiveness

:02:14. > :02:18.in tackling the early stages of grooming because they simply do not

:02:19. > :02:21.record the data. So this Government is ignorant of the reality of risk

:02:22. > :02:26.the children are facing from predatory paedophiles and abusers.

:02:27. > :02:31.As the tactics of perpetrators change, so must our approach. This

:02:32. > :02:34.involves constant vigilance in the way in which perpetrators operate

:02:35. > :02:39.and consummate monitoring the effectiveness of hours response.

:02:40. > :02:42.Failing to record the effectiveness of the current system is

:02:43. > :02:46.unforgivable. If the Minister cannot make an assessment as to whether

:02:47. > :02:50.this works, how can she make an assessment on the safety of children

:02:51. > :02:54.that we owe a duty to protect? New clause 60 would do with this issue

:02:55. > :03:01.directly by requiring police forces manually to collect a number of

:03:02. > :03:05.CAWNs issued, breached and the number of sexual harm prevention

:03:06. > :03:09.orders issued following that bridge. You'd clause 60 will require the

:03:10. > :03:13.Secretary of State to report to Parliament annually on the data. We

:03:14. > :03:17.need to get this legislation right. Every member of this House must take

:03:18. > :03:21.responsibility for the children to whom we owe a duty of care. This

:03:22. > :03:26.cannot be done by having the proper data. It is for that reason that I

:03:27. > :03:31.intend to push for a division on new clause 60. I wish to turn now to

:03:32. > :03:35.news caught him with it Government Amendment 50 six. Both of which

:03:36. > :03:43.relate to the licensing of taxes and private hire vehicles. -- taxis. I

:03:44. > :03:46.know the importance of having a robust taxi licensing scheme for

:03:47. > :03:52.both protecting passengers and drivers. Both independent report

:03:53. > :03:56.into the disaster in rather a recognised the vulnerability of a

:03:57. > :04:01.weak taxi licensing system and what it creates for child protection. I

:04:02. > :04:06.will give way. I am grateful to her for raising this important point to

:04:07. > :04:10.stop I had an adjournment debate on the issue of taxi licensing because

:04:11. > :04:15.we in greater Manchester have a problem, in that a neighbouring

:04:16. > :04:18.local authority in Lancashire is effectively handing out taxi

:04:19. > :04:26.licences like sweets. Often to people who have been legitimately

:04:27. > :04:28.refused taxi licences from any of the ten Greater Manchester

:04:29. > :04:33.authorities, yet they are now operating as private hire taxis on

:04:34. > :04:38.the streets. Is that not something that should be worrying to the

:04:39. > :04:46.public, but also needs strengthening in law to stop happening? I am so

:04:47. > :04:49.grateful for him bringing this up. My deep frustration is, in Rotherham

:04:50. > :04:54.we worked really hard to get the legislation right, we got robust

:04:55. > :04:59.legislation to protect children and within six weeks of that being in

:05:00. > :05:03.fermented, the deregulation bill meant it was not worth the paper it

:05:04. > :05:08.was written on. Because people from other areas can come in, pick up

:05:09. > :05:16.fares, be subcontracted and none of the safeguards have any effect. So I

:05:17. > :05:20.am thankful to him and it is an issue that Government needs to look

:05:21. > :05:22.at. To create the system in Rotherham, there was much

:05:23. > :05:27.consultation with the taxi drivers but also with the survivors of child

:05:28. > :05:31.abuse. Rotherham Borough Council have now implemented a new licensing

:05:32. > :05:37.system which is one of the things that influenced clause ten. After

:05:38. > :05:40.two years, of the horror that we discovered in Rotherham, the

:05:41. > :05:44.Government has failed to take action to make the taxi profession sector

:05:45. > :05:49.across the UK for all vulnerable people. The Government must learn

:05:50. > :05:52.lessons when things like this go catastrophically wrong. At committee

:05:53. > :05:58.level, Labour pushed the Government to push taxi and private vehicle

:05:59. > :06:02.hire licensing authorities under a statutory obligation to prevent

:06:03. > :06:05.child sexual exploitation. Taxi drivers are in a considerable

:06:06. > :06:10.position of trust. The overwhelming majority of taxi drivers live up to

:06:11. > :06:16.the responsibility their role creates, but there are a minority

:06:17. > :06:20.that do not. Better regulation is needed urgently to improve training

:06:21. > :06:23.and awareness of drivers so they can play a part in keeping children safe

:06:24. > :06:28.from harm and also they know how to report abuse if they see it. All

:06:29. > :06:31.local authorities must ensure checks are carried out to prevent

:06:32. > :06:35.perpetrators or preferential -- potential perpetrators from having a

:06:36. > :06:37.licence. Monitoring must be in tears, complaints must be

:06:38. > :06:42.investigated and passengers must feel confident. I'm delighted to see

:06:43. > :06:46.the Government have listened to Labour and have responded to our new

:06:47. > :06:50.clause by introducing one of their own which would empower the

:06:51. > :06:54.Secretary of State to issue a statutory guidance to listing for

:06:55. > :06:56.the licensing authorities. Can the Minister assure us that the

:06:57. > :07:01.Government's new clause 56 would have the same effect as our new

:07:02. > :07:05.clause ten? The new clause empowers but does not require the Secretary

:07:06. > :07:09.of State to issue statutory guidance. I would like the Minister

:07:10. > :07:13.to confirm that the Secretary of State intends to issue guidance and

:07:14. > :07:16.to do so without delay. I would appreciate an indication as to the

:07:17. > :07:21.timeline involved, both on the wallet of the consultation and also

:07:22. > :07:26.when the guidance would take effect. -- the roll-out. I am grateful to

:07:27. > :07:33.her forgiving way whilst I support much of what she says, maybe in the

:07:34. > :07:38.Government's: new clause, isn't part of the problem this, that a

:07:39. > :07:44.particular local authority that issues the licence receives the

:07:45. > :07:49.funding for that licence to be processed, but if they are operating

:07:50. > :07:57.in another part of the country altogether, it is a local authority

:07:58. > :08:03.very distance telephone -- distant, and might have the cost of them and

:08:04. > :08:06.forcing that taxi licence holder? Don't we need some parity in terms

:08:07. > :08:13.of the funding and where that taxi driver is operating? Once again, he

:08:14. > :08:18.is right, I welcome his comments and that is why for me personally, it

:08:19. > :08:22.needs to be a national thing, which the Government has responsibility

:08:23. > :08:27.for. I have to say, the Government has been good at making promises in

:08:28. > :08:31.relation to tackling child sexual exploitation but not so good in

:08:32. > :08:36.following it up with action. Therefore, can the Minister make

:08:37. > :08:39.some commitments on the issues around taxi licensing today? I would

:08:40. > :08:43.also appreciate a skier on the contents of the guidance although

:08:44. > :08:48.this is a subject for consultation, I appreciate. The Minister may wish

:08:49. > :08:50.to write to me on this point. Councils continue to report lack of

:08:51. > :08:55.intelligence sharing from police on issues crucial to deciding the

:08:56. > :08:59.suitability of applicants were taxi licences. Although the new

:09:00. > :09:04.common-law disclosure policy should allow for information sharing, the

:09:05. > :09:08.interpretation varies and many police forces do not share the data.

:09:09. > :09:12.Guidance to cancel alone will not resolve this. Will the Home Office

:09:13. > :09:15.to take steps to ensure police cooperate fully with cancel so they

:09:16. > :09:20.can screen applicants were taxi licences effectively? And will the

:09:21. > :09:24.Minister confirm the status of this guidance, the amendment says

:09:25. > :09:27.authorities must have regard to it. I hope the Minister will clarify

:09:28. > :09:32.that the guidance must be followed, not just looked at and put in a

:09:33. > :09:38.drawer. If the Minister can confirm those questions, we may withdraw our

:09:39. > :09:43.amendment. I now wish to return to new clause 41, which would make it

:09:44. > :09:46.explicit in the law that local safeguarding children's boards have

:09:47. > :09:51.an obligation to prevent child sexual exploitation and other forms

:09:52. > :09:54.of abuse. The boards should bring together all professionals in

:09:55. > :09:59.education, law enforcement, social care and the voluntary sector to

:10:00. > :10:02.help protect children. They are established by the last Labour

:10:03. > :10:05.Government who had the potential to ensure the focus of every

:10:06. > :10:10.organisation on the board has the protection and welfare of children.

:10:11. > :10:13.Look also -- safeguarding children's boards can act as the canary to

:10:14. > :10:17.child sexual exploitation and abuse, to bring together professionals who

:10:18. > :10:22.can develop a full picture of harm being done against a child. But far

:10:23. > :10:26.more emphasis must be given to prevention of child sexual

:10:27. > :10:32.exploitation and abuse. Chief Constable Simon Bailey said in 2015,

:10:33. > :10:34.more than ?1 billion was spent on investigating child abuse

:10:35. > :10:37.allegations. Sadly by the time the police were involved, it is likely

:10:38. > :10:41.the children have already been harmed and would be living with the

:10:42. > :10:44.trauma for the rest of their lives. Prime Minister has himself given

:10:45. > :10:51.child sexual expedition the status of a national threat in a strategic

:10:52. > :10:56.policy requirement. So I hope the Minister will support our new clause

:10:57. > :11:00.to broaden the objectives to include a focus on prevention of sexual

:11:01. > :11:10.exploitation. I will give way. She is making some good points, but it

:11:11. > :11:13.is my understanding that each local safeguarding children board was

:11:14. > :11:17.responsible for developing its own localised version of that CSE plan.

:11:18. > :11:24.And the problem is not so much the plan, it is the unwillingness of

:11:25. > :11:29.some of the partners within that to pull weight. And does she agree the

:11:30. > :11:33.recent review that has been undertaken may need to bring in some

:11:34. > :11:39.statutory duties on those partners to do their bit in partnership with

:11:40. > :11:47.everybody else? As ever, he is superb on this field, and yes, he

:11:48. > :11:51.also is ahead of me by a lying in that I completely agree, because the

:11:52. > :11:55.problem with the safeguarding boards as they stand is they are very

:11:56. > :11:58.dependent on the skill, determination and bloody mindedness

:11:59. > :12:03.of the chair. You are right, I do not want this to be a postcode

:12:04. > :12:08.Lottery, if you have a good chair that can implement a good plan. What

:12:09. > :12:12.I want is for every child across the country to be safe and safeguarded

:12:13. > :12:16.in the same manner. So I look to the Government to try and move on this

:12:17. > :12:22.area. I would now like to speak in support of new clause 13 and 14. I

:12:23. > :12:27.want to begin by praising my honourable friend, the member for

:12:28. > :12:31.Stockport, who works tirelessly for the protection of children in her

:12:32. > :12:35.constituency and across the country. She has also been a role model to me

:12:36. > :12:40.and a mentor to me and I am extremely grateful. I want to put on

:12:41. > :12:44.record my gratitude for all the help she has given me, but also all the

:12:45. > :12:48.children in this country, you have been tireless and I am very grateful

:12:49. > :12:50.for that. Our amendment is looking at the grooming of children for

:12:51. > :12:55.criminal behaviour raise an important issue that this House must

:12:56. > :12:59.tackle. Children are not just a risk of grooming for sex, they face

:13:00. > :13:02.exploitation from criminals for terrorism, trafficking and

:13:03. > :13:08.drug-related offences, just a few examples. This Government must take

:13:09. > :13:12.seriously this issue and offer holistic approaches to tackling

:13:13. > :13:16.child grooming and exploitation. I ask the Minister to work closely

:13:17. > :13:21.with the member for Stockport to develop a new clause 13 and 14 into

:13:22. > :13:29.legislation. Turning to new clauses 46, 47, 61 and 62, through my own

:13:30. > :13:33.campaigning work to prevent violence and exportation and harm against

:13:34. > :13:36.children, I have seen the most dramatic and shocking increase in

:13:37. > :13:42.the proliferation of sexual images, often taken and shared by children.

:13:43. > :13:45.The right honourable member will appreciate the current legislation

:13:46. > :13:49.has only been in effect for a year, so I hope he can support my column

:13:50. > :13:51.on the Government to conduct a thorough review into the

:13:52. > :13:56.effectiveness of the legislation, the number of prosecutions and

:13:57. > :14:00.convictions and the suitability of the sentences. I would also like to

:14:01. > :14:04.welcome new clause 55, which creates a lifetime anonymity for victims of

:14:05. > :14:09.forced marriage. The crime of forced marriage is another form of domestic

:14:10. > :14:13.violence. The victims, mostly women, suffer violence, threats of

:14:14. > :14:16.violence, manipulation, psychological, and economic control.

:14:17. > :14:23.Like every other form of domestic violence, victims have their rights

:14:24. > :14:26.removed from them by their abusers. Anonymity will encourage victims to

:14:27. > :14:31.come forward and seek help from the police. It will give a survivor a

:14:32. > :14:35.chance to regain control and rebuild their life. Now the Government

:14:36. > :14:40.recognises the benefit of anonymity for victims of forced marriage, FGM

:14:41. > :14:44.and sexual abuse, I hope the government will consider extending

:14:45. > :14:47.anonymity to victims of other forms of domestic and sexual violence and

:14:48. > :14:54.needs to do more to raise awareness of these awful crimes. Madam Deputy

:14:55. > :14:57.Speaker, I would like to briefly comment on a number of amendments

:14:58. > :15:04.tabled by the shadow Home Office team, led by my friend, the member

:15:05. > :15:06.for all and St Pancras. It is unfortunate but true that our

:15:07. > :15:10.criminal justice system does not always their support for the victim

:15:11. > :15:16.at its core. I know from my own work that very often they feel totally

:15:17. > :15:20.unsupported when reporting crime. Many victims face the most

:15:21. > :15:25.horrendous ordeal at court, forced to relive their trauma over and over

:15:26. > :15:29.again. Yet there is no statutory framework around the provision of

:15:30. > :15:32.services to victims in the criminal justice system. No legal regime

:15:33. > :15:38.promoting and protecting is -- protecting the rights of victims.

:15:39. > :15:42.Similarly, the role of the Commissioner has great potential but

:15:43. > :15:46.it is under resourced and exists without significant powers. Victims'

:15:47. > :15:51.rights will only be taken seriously if and when they are enshrined in

:15:52. > :15:55.law. I hope the Government will hear our call and make that a reality. I

:15:56. > :16:00.wish to end by commenting on new clause two. It would devolve

:16:01. > :16:02.responsibility from police into the Welsh Assembly. I have had the

:16:03. > :16:07.pleasure of working with the honourable member on other clauses

:16:08. > :16:12.in this bill relating to child protection. I have no doubt that her

:16:13. > :16:18.convictions expressed today in new clause two are heartfelt and sincere

:16:19. > :16:22.need to be taken seriously. As my honourable friend has outlined,

:16:23. > :16:26.Labour believes that the people of Wales should have a greater say over

:16:27. > :16:28.the policing of Wales and this should be pursued through the Wales

:16:29. > :16:43.Bill. I stand to move new clauses 46, 47,

:16:44. > :16:48.61 and 62, standing in my own name. If I might perhaps just where the

:16:49. > :16:55.honourable lady left off there with regard to new clause two, my

:16:56. > :17:01.honourable friend would normally speak in relation to match such as