15/09/2016

:00:00. > :00:00.dismayed to hear about that case. Questions on October 18 may provide

:00:07. > :00:10.the opportunity he is seeking. Personal statement, Mr Justin

:00:11. > :00:14.Tomlinson. With your permission, I would like to make a personal

:00:15. > :00:18.statement. In response to the report published by the privilege committee

:00:19. > :00:21.today and the report published by the Parliamentary Commissioner for

:00:22. > :00:24.standards, I wanted to dig the opportunity to make a full and

:00:25. > :00:30.unreserved apology to you and the House. In 2013, I breached the rules

:00:31. > :00:34.of conduct by sharing a draft report by the committee of Public accounts

:00:35. > :00:37.regarding the regulation of consumer credit and investigation by the

:00:38. > :00:42.Parliamentary commission of standards was initiated in 2015

:00:43. > :00:48.following a complaint made by wonder. I accept the findings of the

:00:49. > :00:52.published today and the reports submitted by the commission of

:00:53. > :00:55.standards. I accept that my actions in sharing the report constitute an

:00:56. > :01:01.interference in the work and committee, and for this I am truly

:01:02. > :01:07.sorry. This was never my intention. These actions came as a result of my

:01:08. > :01:10.own naivete, driven by a desire to strengthen regulations on payday

:01:11. > :01:14.lenders and protect vulnerable consumers. The commission of the

:01:15. > :01:19.standards confirmed this is my motivation based on evidence I have

:01:20. > :01:22.worked on Prost party campaigns to protect consumers, and I had long

:01:23. > :01:28.argued that tighter regulation of the page lending industry. I welcome

:01:29. > :01:32.the report that my actions weren't motivated by financial gain, and I

:01:33. > :01:36.did not act in the way I did for financial gain, nor with the

:01:37. > :01:41.intention of reflecting the views of the company concerned. I appreciate

:01:42. > :01:46.acknowledgement that shall newspaper story following the investigation

:01:47. > :01:49.was unsubstantiated. I have accepted full responsibility since the very

:01:50. > :01:52.beginning of this process and acknowledged in the report I

:01:53. > :01:57.provided and unreserved acceptance of the findings of the Commissioner

:01:58. > :02:01.and have worked fully throughout three different enquiries. I would

:02:02. > :02:04.like to add both my thanks to the privileges committee, the clerk of

:02:05. > :02:09.the committee and the Commissioner the standard lead the diligent work

:02:10. > :02:12.in this process. Mr Speaker, I reiterate my apology today and

:02:13. > :02:18.ungrateful the House has allowed me to make this apology at the earliest

:02:19. > :02:21.opportunity. I thank the honourable gentleman for what he said under way

:02:22. > :02:29.in which he said it. The matter rests there. That is the of it.

:02:30. > :02:35.Statement, the Secretary of State for culture, media and sport, Karen

:02:36. > :02:41.Bradley. With permission, I would like to make a statement. Today I am

:02:42. > :02:45.laying before Parliament a draft of the Royal Charter for the

:02:46. > :02:49.continuance of the BBC. Together with the company and draft framework

:02:50. > :02:55.agreement between the government and the BBC. The latter sets up detail

:02:56. > :03:00.behind the charter, including how the BBC will operate in the new

:03:01. > :03:05.Charter period. These draft is set out the policies contained in the

:03:06. > :03:09.White Paper for the BBC of the future, a broadcaster of

:03:10. > :03:13.distinction, published in May. This white Paper was a culmination of one

:03:14. > :03:20.of the largest public consultations ever. More than 190,000 members of

:03:21. > :03:23.the public, as well as industry stakeholders and experts, gave their

:03:24. > :03:29.views on how the government could enable the BBC to continue to

:03:30. > :03:37.deliver world-class content and services over the next 11 years. The

:03:38. > :03:41.consultation served as a reminder that the BBC matters deeply to this

:03:42. > :03:47.country. As it does to people right across the world. Far from

:03:48. > :03:54.diminishing the BBC, our changes strengthen it. I am very grateful to

:03:55. > :04:00.my predecessor, the right honourable member for Maldon, for all his

:04:01. > :04:04.brilliant work on the BBC. My department has worked very closely

:04:05. > :04:09.with both the BBC and off,, who are taken on the job of being the BBC's

:04:10. > :04:15.first independent regulator to develop and agree these draft

:04:16. > :04:23.documents. Mr Speaker, I am a huge fan of the BBC. At its best, it is

:04:24. > :04:28.peerless. Our aim is to ensure that a strong, distinctive, independent

:04:29. > :04:34.BBC will continue to thrive for years to come. And also to improve

:04:35. > :04:39.the BBC where we can. And can I extend my personal thanks to both

:04:40. > :04:45.Tony Hall and Rowan Fairhead and their teams for their commitment to

:04:46. > :04:50.making this work? The new Charter agreement will enable a number of

:04:51. > :04:55.improvements, Mr Speaker. They enhance the distinctiveness of BBC

:04:56. > :04:59.content and the BBC's mission and public purposes have been reformed

:05:00. > :05:04.to reflect this requirement. The governance and regulation of the BBC

:05:05. > :05:09.will also be reformed. The new BBC board will be responsible for

:05:10. > :05:14.governing the BBC and off, will take under regulation the BBC. The

:05:15. > :05:21.charter and agreement sets out functions and obligations that the

:05:22. > :05:28.BBC and Ofcom must follow to deliver this. The charter recognises the

:05:29. > :05:31.need for the BBC to be independent, particularly in editorial matters.

:05:32. > :05:35.And the BBC will appoint a majority of the members of the new board with

:05:36. > :05:42.strict rules to ensure all appointments are made fairly and

:05:43. > :05:45.openly. The charter also provides financial stability to the BBC. By

:05:46. > :05:50.making clear that the licence fee will remain the key source of

:05:51. > :05:57.funding for the BBC for the next Charter period. Obligations for the

:05:58. > :06:00.BBC to consider both negative and positive market impacts of the

:06:01. > :06:07.activities are set out in the charter. Ofcom must also keep these

:06:08. > :06:14.in mind when renewing new and changed services. The BBC is obliged

:06:15. > :06:21.to work closely with others and share its knowledge, research and

:06:22. > :06:26.expertise for wider public benefit. The government wants a BBC that is

:06:27. > :06:30.as open and transparent as possible. The charter sets out new obligations

:06:31. > :06:40.in this regard. Including publishing the salaries of those employees and

:06:41. > :06:45.talent who earn more than ?150,000. The BBC serves all nations and

:06:46. > :06:49.regions. It needs to be more reflective of the whole of the UK

:06:50. > :06:54.and the new Charter requires space with a mission and public services.

:06:55. > :07:00.This will be supported by specific board representation including the

:07:01. > :07:04.nation members, which were the first time will be agreed with the

:07:05. > :07:08.administrations of Northern Ireland, as well as for Scotland, as is the

:07:09. > :07:13.case. Provision for the nations will be regulated by off gone through a

:07:14. > :07:17.new operating licence regime, which will include continuing the approach

:07:18. > :07:24.of production targets for making programmes outside London. One of

:07:25. > :07:29.the BBC's many responsibilities is to bring people together. Mr

:07:30. > :07:35.Speaker, supporting and encouraging greater cohesion, not least among

:07:36. > :07:38.the nations of this United Kingdom. Mr Speaker, we have made

:07:39. > :07:42.considerable progress since the publication of the White Paper and

:07:43. > :07:47.resolved a number of important areas with the BBC, allowing us to go

:07:48. > :07:52.further in the key areas of transparency, fairness and securing

:07:53. > :07:56.independence for the BBC. In addition to the principle of necks

:07:57. > :08:01.are public and made appointments, all made in line with best practice,

:08:02. > :08:07.I can confirm the charter sets out that the BBC will appoint nine board

:08:08. > :08:10.members, including five nonexecutive directors, and that an additional

:08:11. > :08:15.five will be public appointments. This means the BBC will appoint the

:08:16. > :08:20.majority of members to its new board. This ensures the independence

:08:21. > :08:25.of the BBC board and that each nation of the UK will have a voice.

:08:26. > :08:29.This will strengthen the BBC's independence from the position where

:08:30. > :08:35.all BBC Trustees were appointed by the government. The National Audit

:08:36. > :08:42.Office will become the BBC's financial auditor. In addition, the

:08:43. > :08:46.charter will enhance the role and access and allow it to conduct value

:08:47. > :08:57.for money studies on the BBC's commercial subsidiaries.

:08:58. > :09:04.There will be greater transparency with a fool, fair and open

:09:05. > :09:09.competition for the post of chair of the new BBC board. This is in-line

:09:10. > :09:15.with the culture select committee 's recommendation. It is a significant

:09:16. > :09:19.new post and transparency and fairness in making the employment is

:09:20. > :09:24.vital, not least so that industry and the public have confidence. I am

:09:25. > :09:28.grateful to Rona Fairhead who has decided not to be a candidate for

:09:29. > :09:34.the new post, for the work she has done as chair of the BBC trust, and

:09:35. > :09:41.in particular for her help in reforming the governance of the BBC.

:09:42. > :09:44.The fundamental reforms set out in the draft charter will take time to

:09:45. > :09:49.implement, given the complexity of the changes, the need for a smooth

:09:50. > :09:54.transition and the importance of consulting on some elements of the

:09:55. > :09:59.new regulatory structure. There will be a short period of transition

:10:00. > :10:02.before the BBC board and of common take on their new governors and

:10:03. > :10:18.regulatory roles on the 3rd of April next year. -- and Ofcom take on. We

:10:19. > :10:24.will work closely with the BBC .com to make sure all elements of

:10:25. > :10:29.transition are managed smoothly, to ensure the new BBC board will be

:10:30. > :10:34.established. Members of both houses will now have a chance to consider

:10:35. > :10:38.the proposals in detail. To help them with that, I have today

:10:39. > :10:43.deposited a series of information sheets in the libraries of both

:10:44. > :10:47.houses. I have also sent the draft documents to the devolved

:10:48. > :10:50.administrations, in order that the devolved legislatures will be able

:10:51. > :10:56.to debate them over the coming weeks. My DC MS ministerial

:10:57. > :11:04.colleagues and I look forward to parliamentary debates on the draft

:11:05. > :11:14.policy in due course. It will then be given to the Privy Council. The

:11:15. > :11:19.BBC is one of this country's greatest achievements and greatest

:11:20. > :11:23.treasures. These reforms ensure it will continue to be cherished at

:11:24. > :11:31.home and abroad for many years to come, and I commend the statement to

:11:32. > :11:37.the House. Thank you. May I first thank the Secretary of State for

:11:38. > :11:42.prior sight of her statement. The BBC is one of Britain's greatest

:11:43. > :11:45.achievements and treasures, and the broadcaster against which other

:11:46. > :11:48.broadcasters across the world are judged, and the quality of

:11:49. > :11:54.programmes are second to none. The BBC must be protected and sustained

:11:55. > :11:57.and its independence and funding. Would she accept that both of these

:11:58. > :12:02.are under some degree of threat? Is it not the case that the charter

:12:03. > :12:05.will sustain a degree of pressure under the BBC having government

:12:06. > :12:14.appointees on its new board, but more significantly would she accept

:12:15. > :12:24.that by introducing mid-term, this will put pressure on the BBC to look

:12:25. > :12:26.over its shoulder and seek to avoid upsetting governments when it should

:12:27. > :12:29.be genuinely independent and free to comment without fear or favour on

:12:30. > :12:33.what governments do. How will viewers and listeners be assured

:12:34. > :12:37.that the five-year health check will not put undue pressure on the BBC

:12:38. > :12:45.and be interpreted as a charter review? The new board with a number

:12:46. > :12:51.of government appointees responsible for decision-making could weaken the

:12:52. > :12:55.editorial independence. What guarantees would she give that the

:12:56. > :12:59.undue pressures from government would not affect BBC independence?

:13:00. > :13:05.Regarding funding, what assurances does she have for Lord Patten, what

:13:06. > :13:10.answers does she have for him, former chair of the BBC and

:13:11. > :13:15.conservative cabinet minister, that the BBC's financial security will be

:13:16. > :13:20.affected now it's cost of the over 75 TV licences are foisted on them,

:13:21. > :13:24.a decision he described as a heist. We take the view that welfare

:13:25. > :13:28.benefits such as the TV licences should be decided and paid for by

:13:29. > :13:32.government, not squeezed out of the BBC staff and programming, other

:13:33. > :13:35.licence fee payers and other pensioners. What answer does she

:13:36. > :13:42.have two that there and logical case? The government has also

:13:43. > :13:46.suggested that the BBC should have distinctiveness, a major departure

:13:47. > :13:53.from the view that the BBC should inform, educate and entertain.

:13:54. > :13:56.Channel 4 was created to bring distinctiveness to viewing, but as I

:13:57. > :14:01.direct affect on the squeeze of BBC funding, great BBC entertainment

:14:02. > :14:05.programmes are being moved to Channel 4. Is there not a threat

:14:06. > :14:09.that more of these programmes could follow? Even more worrying than that

:14:10. > :14:13.is that BBC funding might be further top sliced in future, can she give

:14:14. > :14:17.guarantees that this will not happen? Will she look again at

:14:18. > :14:21.government policy and its relationship with the BBC and give

:14:22. > :14:25.guarantees that the charter will not diminish the scope and effectiveness

:14:26. > :14:31.of the BBC? Will she accept that change is now being brought forward

:14:32. > :14:36.by government wants damage the BBC and its independence and its ability

:14:37. > :14:39.to put on the finest programmes because of the impact on its

:14:40. > :14:42.funding? It should be able to continue to put on the finest

:14:43. > :14:47.programmes across the range of its broadcasting. What assurances can

:14:48. > :14:53.the government give back if transferring regulation of the BBC

:14:54. > :14:56.to offer, it will retain its independence? What assurances can

:14:57. > :15:14.she give that the BBC will be able to carry on making programmes we all

:15:15. > :15:19.enjoy. Finally... Can I thank him for his comments and I agree with

:15:20. > :15:27.him that the BBC must be protected and sustained. The work we have done

:15:28. > :15:32.is to make sure the BBC cannot just survive but flourish in a new era,

:15:33. > :15:36.where it is not the world where everyone sat down and watched the

:15:37. > :15:39.same programme at the same time. People are accessing TV programmes

:15:40. > :15:46.in different ways and we want to make sure that this charter, which

:15:47. > :15:50.is an 11 year charter, for the first she -- for the first time we have

:15:51. > :15:55.made it an 11 year charter so it does not coincide with the electoral

:15:56. > :16:02.cycle, so there is no political influence on it. In addition, we do

:16:03. > :16:06.want to make sure this is the longest charter there has ever been,

:16:07. > :16:12.and therefore a mid-term review to ensure the BBC is still delivering

:16:13. > :16:19.what licence fee payers, which we all are, want to see is a very

:16:20. > :16:23.important part of the proposals. I must pick up on the point about the

:16:24. > :16:27.deputy chair of. There is no longer a deputy chair within the broad

:16:28. > :16:31.structure. There is a chair for a nation members that our government,

:16:32. > :16:35.public appointments. It is very important that we have a member for

:16:36. > :16:39.each of the nations on the board and that that is a full public

:16:40. > :16:45.appointment and that the chair is also an open and transparent

:16:46. > :16:50.appointment, but we're not appointing a deputy chair, that is a

:16:51. > :16:54.matter for the board to determine who the senior independent director

:16:55. > :16:57.should be. He mentioned distinctiveness and ensuring

:16:58. > :17:01.distinctiveness. The board distinctiveness is taken from the

:17:02. > :17:07.White Paper, which was a result of the consultation for which we had

:17:08. > :17:13.the hundreds -- 190,000 responses. The largest consultation of its

:17:14. > :17:18.kind. I accept his point about Channel 4 and making sure there is a

:17:19. > :17:22.difference between Channel 4 and the BBC, but for licence fee payers and

:17:23. > :17:27.for us as a nation, the distinctiveness of the BBC is what

:17:28. > :17:33.makes it so great. It is the thing that makes the BBC something that we

:17:34. > :17:37.can sell across the world. Over the summer I don't think there is any

:17:38. > :17:42.offers who did not come into contact with some form of BBC content while

:17:43. > :17:49.we were abroad on original idea that was being shown locally or talked

:17:50. > :17:53.about locally. He talks about editorial independence. This charter

:17:54. > :17:57.is setting out editorial independence and ensuring this is an

:17:58. > :18:02.entirely independent BBC. I think it is worth also saying that while

:18:03. > :18:05.public appointments will be public appointment is going through the

:18:06. > :18:10.full process, once they are board members they are BBC board members

:18:11. > :18:14.working towards ensuring the BBC is the greatest it possibly can be.

:18:15. > :18:22.Finally he made a point about funding. On the over 75 TV licences

:18:23. > :18:26.point, if I could quote the director-general, Tony Hall, he said

:18:27. > :18:31.in July 2015, the government's decision to bid the cost of the over

:18:32. > :18:36.75 on as has been more than matched by the deal coming back for the BBC.

:18:37. > :18:40.As I mentioned earlier there is another statement to follow, then

:18:41. > :18:44.two debates to take place under the auspices of the backbench business

:18:45. > :18:50.committee, of which the first is notably well subscribed, so there is

:18:51. > :18:55.a premium on brevity. Can I appeal to colleagues, even distinguished

:18:56. > :19:01.backbench members, to avoid discoverers of commentary or lengthy

:19:02. > :19:13.preamble, and just get to an enquiry. Will she confirmed that

:19:14. > :19:17.this draft charter is not, as some have said, either a damp squib or

:19:18. > :19:23.the brainchild of Rupert Murdoch? Does she agree that the charter

:19:24. > :19:27.makes significant changes, including the new governance structure, the

:19:28. > :19:32.new requirements, diversity, distinctiveness and impartiality,

:19:33. > :19:37.the opening up of a schedule to 100% competition, and full access to the

:19:38. > :19:45.NAO, that these changes will ensure that the BBC continues to be the

:19:46. > :19:52.best broadcaster in the world? Yes, I agree. My right honourable friend,

:19:53. > :20:00.we owe a great debt to him for the place we are with the charter today.

:20:01. > :20:04.May I thank the Secretary of State for advanced sight of this. We're

:20:05. > :20:10.great champions of public service broadcasting. There are a number of

:20:11. > :20:15.her announcements which we welcome. We welcome the commitment to

:20:16. > :20:19.equality and diversity, we welcome the commitment to transparency and

:20:20. > :20:24.openness. As you know, this is something we have not always seen in

:20:25. > :20:27.the BBC, not least with the appointment of Lorna Fairhead, as we

:20:28. > :20:33.discovered at the select committee hearings, she was appointed after a

:20:34. > :20:37.cosy private chat with the Prime Minister, which is not the way that

:20:38. > :20:42.significant appointment should be made. -- Rhona Fairhead. She is

:20:43. > :20:48.entirely right to throw open disappointment to public

:20:49. > :20:55.competition. -- this appointment to public competition. We also welcome

:20:56. > :20:59.the conditions and talent pay. Does she agree that the BBC argument that

:21:00. > :21:05.this will be a charter to poach talent is quite simply nonsense? If

:21:06. > :21:11.your agent is worth his or her salt, they will know exactly how much you

:21:12. > :21:19.and all your competition are paid. I know this from bitter experience.

:21:20. > :21:24.What the danger of this particular announcement is, perhaps she would

:21:25. > :21:28.agree, is that the BBC will be forced to reveal the salaries of

:21:29. > :21:36.many of its more mediocre but overpaid employees, and there may be

:21:37. > :21:41.some teeth gnashing as a result when they discover what goes on behind

:21:42. > :21:45.closed doors. We welcome the recognition of gay leak, but will

:21:46. > :21:49.she go further for us and tell us whether this

:21:50. > :22:03.Whether this should be Welsh? -- - Gaelic. It says one of the BBC... He

:22:04. > :22:10.is out of his time, but he will be finishing his sentences. Would she

:22:11. > :22:14.agree that the matter of a separate Scottish six O'Clock News isn't

:22:15. > :22:23.ideal the responsibility of the BBC and the right to continue? I suspect

:22:24. > :22:33.there is significant personal feeling amongst his comments above

:22:34. > :22:39.pay. I will not comment further. On the subject of the role of the chair

:22:40. > :22:49.of the new BBC board, this is an entirely new role. This is not a

:22:50. > :22:57.continuation of the BBC trust. I want to pay tribute to Rona

:22:58. > :23:03.Fairhead, but it needed to be open to a full recruitment process to

:23:04. > :23:08.make sure we get the right person for the job. I accept that she has

:23:09. > :23:12.decided to not put herself forward for the role. If I can return to the

:23:13. > :23:18.point about regional broadcasting and BBC Alba, he will appreciate

:23:19. > :23:23.that it is part of the BBC, whereas S4 see is a separate independent

:23:24. > :23:30.business, which is why there may appear to be a difference in terms

:23:31. > :23:35.of treatment. -- S4C. It is to reflect that BBC Alba is a

:23:36. > :23:41.wholly-owned part of the BBC. We have beefed up considerably the role

:23:42. > :23:49.in the charter. Finally, on the point about the Scottish six, the

:23:50. > :23:54.BBC is the nation's broadcaster, and I expect the BBC to reflect the

:23:55. > :24:00.national mood and national news that is important across the nation. But

:24:01. > :24:02.he is right that it is for the BBC, who have operational independence in

:24:03. > :24:09.this matter, who determine exactly how to make that happen. May I echo

:24:10. > :24:13.the Secretary of State's praise for the Member for Molden, and I would

:24:14. > :24:22.say that the charter has been significantly enhanced by the

:24:23. > :24:31.amendments, particularly on pay. May ask the Secretary of State make sure

:24:32. > :24:37.diversity remains a significant part of the charter? I pay tribute to him

:24:38. > :24:41.for the role he carried out, the longest serving Culture Minister I

:24:42. > :24:46.think we have ever seen. I agree with him on his points on diversity.

:24:47. > :24:50.I can confirm that is the case. Given where we could have ended up,

:24:51. > :24:55.can I welcome this statement today, in particular the government's

:24:56. > :24:59.backing down of the composition of the board. But given that Rona

:25:00. > :25:03.Fairhead was appointed to effectively abolish her own

:25:04. > :25:07.organisation and has done so, and to oversee as huge transfer to a

:25:08. > :25:14.unitary board, hasn't her treatment been a little rough? I do not accept

:25:15. > :25:19.this is a backbone on the board. This is about looking up what is

:25:20. > :25:24.appropriate -- and appropriate balanced board, which will make the

:25:25. > :25:31.most effective way to deliver on its charter requirements. I do not think

:25:32. > :25:35.it is the case with Miss Fairhead, this is no reflection on his or her

:25:36. > :25:40.ability to do the role, but this is merely a brand-new role. I welcome

:25:41. > :25:42.the decision to accept the recommendation of the select

:25:43. > :25:46.committee that there should be an open and fair process for the

:25:47. > :25:50.appointment of the chair of the board. When do she hope that

:25:51. > :25:56.appointment will be made, and when the new unitary board will assume

:25:57. > :26:02.its new responsibilities? My honorary friend -- honourable friend

:26:03. > :26:07.has done sterling work, and influence the work we have done over

:26:08. > :26:12.the summer on the charter. As I said in my statement, I expect the new

:26:13. > :26:16.board to be in place and all the regulatory issues working by the 3rd

:26:17. > :26:22.of April next year, but I would expect the new chair of the board to

:26:23. > :26:26.be appointed before then. Does the Secretary of State acknowledge that

:26:27. > :26:29.a lot of us do not share the sentimentality often expressed about

:26:30. > :26:36.the BBC, especially when they have been at the brunt of its bias over

:26:37. > :26:39.several years? In terms of its transparency, could the Secretary of

:26:40. > :26:46.State outline why has this been limited to the publication of

:26:47. > :26:49.expenses or salaries over ?150,000? Why can it not be brought in line

:26:50. > :26:53.with members of Parliament expenses, in terms of ?75,000 and all other

:26:54. > :27:08.expenses including travel and accommodation? I know he has

:27:09. > :27:13.long-term issues, would be the best way of putting it, but there are

:27:14. > :27:18.many programmes he enjoys, I am sure, and it is something we should

:27:19. > :27:22.cherish and really want to protect. This is Britain at its best when it

:27:23. > :27:29.is at its best. The Rio Olympics being a prime example of when the

:27:30. > :27:33.whole of Britain came together. Regarding transparency on pay, it is

:27:34. > :27:39.in line with civil servants on transparency, but at the moment the

:27:40. > :27:47.first disclosures will be on bigger bands than we have. Wide does it

:27:48. > :27:51.need the criminal law in place to encourage people to pay for it? In

:27:52. > :27:56.terms of transparency, does she agree with me that if the BBC wants

:27:57. > :27:59.to take public money, it should be transparent, and if it doesn't want

:28:00. > :28:04.to be then it should not take public money?

:28:05. > :28:12.We carried out the review looking at decriminalisation and it found there

:28:13. > :28:16.was a need for a criminal sanction on the system but this is one of

:28:17. > :28:19.those issues which will continue to be luck at, and of course the BBC

:28:20. > :28:25.needs to be transparent to show it is reducing value for money. Can I

:28:26. > :28:29.thank the Secretary of State about the importance of the BBC, any

:28:30. > :28:36.organisation which can turn Ed Balls into Fred Astaire is remarkable.

:28:37. > :28:39.Canty emphasise the charter does not undermine effectivity of BBC

:28:40. > :28:44.Scotland's news programming and underline how important it is for

:28:45. > :28:50.audiences to programming and not politicians? I agree, this is for

:28:51. > :28:54.the BBC and the viewing public to make that determination. They will

:28:55. > :28:57.watch the programmes they want to watch and the BBC can take editorial

:28:58. > :29:09.decisions around it. I'm not sure the right honourable member is keen

:29:10. > :29:15.she's married to Fred Astaire. Just for clarity, I would like to ask the

:29:16. > :29:19.Secretary of State wider is no provision in the statement that

:29:20. > :29:24.Scotland's own Six O'Clock News. That is a matter of editorial

:29:25. > :29:34.independence of the BBC and for them to make that decision. Wendy for the

:29:35. > :29:42.education and culture committee of the Scotland -- when the, decisions

:29:43. > :29:47.would rest of London executives. Does this new Charter satisfy the

:29:48. > :29:51.desire by people in Scotland with greater autonomy over decisions lies

:29:52. > :29:55.where it should for commissioners in Scotland? She will have seen the

:29:56. > :30:01.letter from the director-general setting out his view of how the BBC

:30:02. > :30:06.ensures that happens. As an independent BBC, it is for them to

:30:07. > :30:09.make sure that happens. Can I welcome my right honourable friend's

:30:10. > :30:13.statement, in relation to the involvement of the National Audit

:30:14. > :30:18.Office? And the value for money assessments they will be able to

:30:19. > :30:21.make. Does she agree that this should deliver confidence,

:30:22. > :30:28.transparency, accountability and financial rigour? I do. We've seen

:30:29. > :30:35.the BBC unable increasingly to afford sports events, the great

:30:36. > :30:44.British bake off an order, pressures on the BBC services. Isn't it a case

:30:45. > :30:56.this government keeps undermining? They have do fund the World Service,

:30:57. > :30:59.local TV and ?600 million. I totally disagree, I will quote the

:31:00. > :31:03.director-general who said far from being a cut, the way this financial

:31:04. > :31:08.settlement is shaved gives us effectively flat licence fee income

:31:09. > :31:14.across the first five years of the next Charter. Will she make sure no

:31:15. > :31:18.decisions are taken about the monitoring service before important

:31:19. > :31:23.select committee enquiries are held next month? Can I say, I did not

:31:24. > :31:31.share this unhealthy obsession with what other people earn. I was told

:31:32. > :31:38.it was rude to ask. I will write to my right on boyfriend on that

:31:39. > :31:42.answer. -- right honourable friend. In her statement she talked about

:31:43. > :31:47.the nations, but in terms of the regions, can she say in the charter

:31:48. > :31:53.will impact on regional news programmes and regional local radio,

:31:54. > :32:00.such as BBC Humberside? The decisions about news programming our

:32:01. > :32:04.editorial matters for the BBC and they have independence, as set out

:32:05. > :32:08.in the charter. I strongly agree with her we need to see strong

:32:09. > :32:15.regional programming across the whole of the UK and that is what is

:32:16. > :32:20.clear on this charter. Following on from the honourable lady's question,

:32:21. > :32:25.the Secretary of State will be aware that English regions feel their

:32:26. > :32:29.voice is not heard loud enough. She refers specifically to Scotland,

:32:30. > :32:34.Wales and Northern Ireland. What representation will there be for the

:32:35. > :32:39.English regions? I can assure there will be an English board member, a

:32:40. > :32:43.public appointment, and I will do everything I can to make sure that

:32:44. > :32:49.board member represents the regions of England. In his latest report,

:32:50. > :32:53.the audience Council of Wales of the corporation needs to be more

:32:54. > :32:58.accountable to Welsh audiences. How will this be achieved and can she

:32:59. > :33:02.commit a Wales member will sit permanently on the board of Ofcom

:33:03. > :33:09.now it has assumed the role of external regulator? He is confusing

:33:10. > :33:13.the new unitary border with Ofcom, they are separate bodies, the Ofcom

:33:14. > :33:18.is a regulator, the new unitary board will have governance over the

:33:19. > :33:21.BBC. The Secretary of State will be aware the epic battle in the last

:33:22. > :33:25.Parliament between the Public Accounts Committee and the BBC over

:33:26. > :33:32.the issue of redundancy payments were senior managers. Part was the

:33:33. > :33:37.discrepancy between legal resources, and so on that basis while I welcome

:33:38. > :33:41.the involvement of the National Audit Office, will she'd ensure they

:33:42. > :33:46.have the appropriate resources and power to hold the BBC to account?

:33:47. > :33:51.Yes, I can give him that assurance and I can tell him we're putting a

:33:52. > :33:59.cap on payments on redundancy of ?95,000. Can the Minister tell us

:34:00. > :34:05.what limit the is on the commissioning programmes? It was

:34:06. > :34:11.100% commissioning, you could have privatisation by the back door.

:34:12. > :34:18.Clearly the BBC needs to produce original content. But the way they

:34:19. > :34:22.do that, by commissioning through independent production companies,

:34:23. > :34:25.means we get a thriving independent production sector that then consult

:34:26. > :34:31.the rest of the world. I encourage them to do all this and make sure we

:34:32. > :34:35.have those creative clusters. If we look at Manchester, for example, an

:34:36. > :34:39.amazing amount of activity and new businesses as a result of BBC being

:34:40. > :34:46.in Manchester commissioning programmes. Does this Secretary of

:34:47. > :34:51.State share my hope and that expressed by Clare balding that when

:34:52. > :34:58.talent salaries revealed it does not reveal a gender pay gap? I think he

:34:59. > :35:06.makes it very good point. I'm glad to see some progress on this issue

:35:07. > :35:14.as I have a staff raised in Glasgow -- 850 staff based in Glasgow.

:35:15. > :35:25.Will she be clear, and will she meets the request from BBC Alba to

:35:26. > :35:33.increase in-house programme contribution to BBC Alba, to match

:35:34. > :35:40.that ten hours a week? As I said in response to her honourable friend,

:35:41. > :35:47.BBC Alba is a subsidiary of the BBC, where is S foresee is not. I agree

:35:48. > :35:51.there are some fantastic broadcasters from Glasgow and we do

:35:52. > :35:56.want to make sure BBC Alba and others have the resources they need.

:35:57. > :36:03.The village and the league of gentlemen were both made my

:36:04. > :36:07.constituency, those programmes bring great economic benefit because

:36:08. > :36:10.people come here. In the draft charter, is there something to

:36:11. > :36:14.encourage the production of programmes outside London in all our

:36:15. > :36:18.consistency so we all get the benefit of the BBC? I have to

:36:19. > :36:22.declare an interest because I have cousins who live in Hadfield,

:36:23. > :36:25.otherwise known as Royston Vaizey. I'm keen to make sure there are

:36:26. > :36:42.other visitors there. ... Free TV licences but if it

:36:43. > :36:49.satisfies. I was told the Scottish figure is 49 million, a lot of many.

:36:50. > :36:51.Can the government to respond to the criticism that transferring across

:36:52. > :36:56.from government to the BBC will have a detrimental affect on high-quality

:36:57. > :37:01.programming? I simply don't agree with that point, I do not agree that

:37:02. > :37:06.this is going to impact on programming when the BBC have the

:37:07. > :37:12.guaranteed licence fee rising in line with inflation over the

:37:13. > :37:16.five-year period. Can I welcome the statement from the Secretary of

:37:17. > :37:19.State? Can she give me assurances the excellent training and develop

:37:20. > :37:21.meant and apprenticeship programmes of the BBC run will not be affected

:37:22. > :37:31.by this charter review? Could the Secretary of State tell

:37:32. > :37:35.the House how these measures will deal with the widely accepted view,

:37:36. > :37:40.and it may be shared by the honourable member who speaks for the

:37:41. > :37:45.opposition, that the BBC is institutionally biased in favour of

:37:46. > :37:50.the European Union? My honourable friend will be pleased to know Ofcom

:37:51. > :37:55.is the regulator and the new proposals and that the NAL will be

:37:56. > :37:59.looking at the value for money for the taxpayer and all of that will

:38:00. > :38:06.help to make sure BBC bias is addressed. Can my right honourable

:38:07. > :38:09.friend confirmed that under the Charter, the BBC will continue

:38:10. > :38:14.properly to invest in excellent local radio such as the station her

:38:15. > :38:19.constituents and I share? I don't know how he held back from

:38:20. > :38:23.mentioning BBC Radio Stoke by name. I know there will not give me an

:38:24. > :38:32.easy time and I don't give that assurance. -- if I don't give that

:38:33. > :38:41.assurance. He wasn't looking to intervene on this, but on the next.

:38:42. > :38:47.I'm grateful. Statement, the Secretary of State for business,

:38:48. > :38:52.energy and industrial strategy. Doctor Greg Clark.

:38:53. > :39:05.I would like to make a statement on the Hinkley point CE nuclear power

:39:06. > :39:09.plant. In July, following a statement, regarding the ?18 billion

:39:10. > :39:16.project to build a new project in Somerset, I would ask the government

:39:17. > :39:20.to consider all points of the contract and we would make a

:39:21. > :39:24.decision by the early autumn. I can announce that the government has

:39:25. > :39:29.decided to proceed with the first new nuclear power station for a

:39:30. > :39:32.generation. But this is made with two important changes. On the

:39:33. > :39:38.project itself, the government will now be able to prevent the sale of

:39:39. > :39:42.EDF's controlling stake before the completion of construction. This

:39:43. > :39:46.will be confirmed in an exchange of letters between the government and

:39:47. > :39:49.EDF. Existing legal powers and the new legal framework will mean the

:39:50. > :39:57.government is able to intervene in the sale of EDF steak once it is

:39:58. > :40:02.operational. Further more and more importantly, we reformed the legal

:40:03. > :40:06.framework for foreign investments in British critical infrastructure.

:40:07. > :40:09.These reforms will have three elements. Firstly, after Hinkley the

:40:10. > :40:14.British Government will take a special share in all future nuclear

:40:15. > :40:18.new-build projects. This will ensure that significant stakes cannot be

:40:19. > :40:23.sold without the government's knowledge or consent. Secondly, the

:40:24. > :40:27.office for nuclear regulation will be directed to require notice from

:40:28. > :40:32.developers or operators of nuclear sites of any change of ownership or

:40:33. > :40:43.part ownership. This will allow the government to advise or direct the

:40:44. > :40:49.ONL to take action. The government will reform its ownership and

:40:50. > :40:53.control of infrastructure to ensure the implications of foreign

:40:54. > :40:56.ownership are scrutinised for the purposes of national scrutiny. This

:40:57. > :41:10.will include a review of the public interest regime and the introduction

:41:11. > :41:13.of a ... The changes will bring Britain's policy framework for the

:41:14. > :41:17.ownership and control of the infrastructure into line with other

:41:18. > :41:21.major economies, allowing the UK Government to take a favour and

:41:22. > :41:24.consistent approach to the National security implications of critical

:41:25. > :41:28.infrastructure including nuclear energy in the future. These changes

:41:29. > :41:32.mean that while the UK will remain one of the most open economies in

:41:33. > :41:35.the world, the public can be confident that foreign direct

:41:36. > :41:42.investment works always in the country's best interests. This ?18

:41:43. > :41:46.billion investment in Britain provides an upgrade in our supply of

:41:47. > :41:50.clean energy. When it begins producing electricity in the middle

:41:51. > :41:56.of the next decade it will provide 7% of the UK's electricity needs,

:41:57. > :42:01.giving secure energy to 6 million homes for 60 years. Furthermore it

:42:02. > :42:04.must be stressed that the contracts negotiated places all the

:42:05. > :42:09.construction risk on investors alone. Consumers will not pay a

:42:10. > :42:21.penny unless and until the plant generates electricity. The new site

:42:22. > :42:26.contains important elements of insurance in construction and future

:42:27. > :42:32.high gas prices, which have historically been volatile. It

:42:33. > :42:38.compares broadly with other clean energy, with additional costs of

:42:39. > :42:43.intermittency, or gas capture and storage, for example. Hinkley

:42:44. > :42:50.unleashes a long overdue wave of investment in nuclear engineering in

:42:51. > :42:52.the UK, creating 26,000 jobs and apprenticeships, providing a huge

:42:53. > :42:56.boost to the economy not only in the South West Burton of the part of the

:42:57. > :43:00.country, through the supply chain of firms big and small that will

:43:01. > :43:04.benefit from the investment. EDF have also confirmed that UK

:43:05. > :43:11.businesses are set to secure 64% of the value of the investment being

:43:12. > :43:17.made, the biggest single capital projects in the UK today. As the

:43:18. > :43:20.first of a wave of new nuclear plants, we expect the experience of

:43:21. > :43:27.rebooting the nuclear industry to mean that the cost should reduce for

:43:28. > :43:32.future nuclear power stations, of which another five are proposed. In

:43:33. > :43:38.any consideration of nuclear power, safety will always be the number one

:43:39. > :43:44.consideration. The construction Hinkley point C will be under close

:43:45. > :43:50.year of the office of nuclear regulation, which has the power

:43:51. > :43:53.necessary to halt construction or require amendments to any part of

:43:54. > :43:58.the plant if it is not completely satisfied with the safety of any

:43:59. > :44:01.part of the reactor and its associated construction. Unlike in

:44:02. > :44:14.the past, the long-term decommissioning costs will be... Any

:44:15. > :44:19.investment that provide significant electricity supplies for the next

:44:20. > :44:23.two generations of British people and businesses requires deserve

:44:24. > :44:27.serious consideration. It was right that the new government should have

:44:28. > :44:31.taken the time to consider all components of the project, and now

:44:32. > :44:34.having reviewed the project, the government is satisfied that the

:44:35. > :44:37.improved deal and the other changes announced will, for the first time,

:44:38. > :44:42.remedy the weaknesses of the previous regime of foreign ownership

:44:43. > :44:46.for critical infrastructure. Is important that the right balance for

:44:47. > :44:50.welcoming foreign investment and ensuring it serves the national

:44:51. > :44:54.interest is made, which these changes would achieve. The

:44:55. > :45:00.investment will secure 7% of the UK's electricity needs for 60 years.

:45:01. > :45:03.Helping replace existing nuclear capacity which is due to be

:45:04. > :45:10.decommissioned in the decade ahead. The electricity generated would be

:45:11. > :45:12.reliable and low carbon, so completely reliable with climate

:45:13. > :45:18.change obligations. And Hinkley point C will inaugurate a new era of

:45:19. > :45:22.UK nuclear power with UK-based businesses benefiting from almost

:45:23. > :45:28.two thirds of the ?18 billion value of the project, with 26,000 jobs and

:45:29. > :45:34.apprenticeships created. It is now right that we support this major

:45:35. > :45:37.upgrade, the first of many, to the infrastructure of which our future

:45:38. > :45:44.depends. I commend the statement to the House. I thank the Secretary of

:45:45. > :45:47.State for the 13 minutes advance notice of his statement. First let

:45:48. > :45:54.me be clear, this is an important project that must now go forward

:45:55. > :45:58.without any further interruption or delay. The Secretary of State is

:45:59. > :46:01.aware that by intervening on the 28th of July after EDF's final

:46:02. > :46:06.investment decision, the government Peter Greste 25,000 well-paid jobs,

:46:07. > :46:14.well-qualified jobs. He knows that it not only list the investment into

:46:15. > :46:18.UK jobs and infrastructure, but dropped confidence on investors, who

:46:19. > :46:23.now believe that the Prime Minister does not understand the significance

:46:24. > :46:28.that companies attach to the taking of the final investment decision. --

:46:29. > :46:41.the government put at risk 25,000 well-paid jobs. The delay has only

:46:42. > :46:46.unsettled investors further. Did the Prime Minister attempt in any way to

:46:47. > :46:53.isolate the building of a reactor from the deal at Hinkley Point see.

:46:54. > :46:57.What was the Chinese response? Every member of the House will agree that

:46:58. > :46:59.government has primary responsibility to safeguard national

:47:00. > :47:03.security, but neither the Secretary of State or the Prime Minister have

:47:04. > :47:08.never been clearer about what they consider to be the security risks

:47:09. > :47:13.associated with the current deal, so will he said he is out now, so that

:47:14. > :47:15.the House and public can take a decision as to whether the

:47:16. > :47:21.modifications he is proposing adequately reflect the risks he

:47:22. > :47:30.believe exist. Can he set out whether the government were happy

:47:31. > :47:33.with what he set out regarding the nuclear reactor, and if so was he

:47:34. > :47:38.aware that two such reactors are already under construction in China?

:47:39. > :47:41.Were they concerned about the potential of a cyber attack, and had

:47:42. > :47:45.he not consider that given the importance to the Chinese of having

:47:46. > :47:49.Bradwell advocate well standard to market their reactor technology

:47:50. > :47:52.around the world, such an attack would undermine the very reason why

:47:53. > :47:57.the Chinese wanted to be involved in the project in the first place. The

:47:58. > :48:00.Secretary of State wishes to dodge these questions, if he does by

:48:01. > :48:05.pleading he does not wish to discuss security matters, then I would ask

:48:06. > :48:07.how he can assure the House and the public that the efficacy of the

:48:08. > :48:11.amendments he is proposing are sufficient to meet the risks and

:48:12. > :48:17.challenges that justified a near fatal delay of the project? We must

:48:18. > :48:22.address this whole argument that the government has actually presented as

:48:23. > :48:25.well as those they have not. They have claimed they have introduced

:48:26. > :48:29.significant new safeguards into this package, in particular that they

:48:30. > :48:34.will be able to require notification from owners are operators of nuclear

:48:35. > :48:43.sites of any change of ownership or part ownership. But the Secretary of

:48:44. > :48:49.State already has such powers. Will he acknowledge that he can currently

:48:50. > :48:53.prevent the sale of any infrastructure, and can he explain

:48:54. > :48:58.why he believes the proposed new powers adds significantly to the

:48:59. > :49:02.public interest regulations in the enterprise act 2002, or are they

:49:03. > :49:06.merely windowdressing to make it appear that the government's

:49:07. > :49:10.intervention has achieved something, no matter how much appearances may

:49:11. > :49:13.indicate to the contrary? Is he aware of the House of Commons

:49:14. > :49:19.briefing paper entitled mergers in the public interest, which measures

:49:20. > :49:22.that energy security is already covered by national security and the

:49:23. > :49:26.government already has the powers to prevent such a sale? Is he aware

:49:27. > :49:31.that in the House of Lords during the passage of the energy act, my

:49:32. > :49:36.noble friend introduced an amendment specifically to introduce energy

:49:37. > :49:41.security as a new public interest term. Government lawyers then

:49:42. > :49:46.advised, in cases where a a merger opposed a genuine and serious threat

:49:47. > :49:51.to societal needs, such as energy supply, this would be covered by the

:49:52. > :49:55.existing provisions in the 2002 regarding national security?

:49:56. > :50:02.Investors would be empowered to directly intervene. The government

:50:03. > :50:06.created a commercial crisis, sending shock waves through the industry and

:50:07. > :50:11.unions, they list a the dramatic dispute with one of our key future

:50:12. > :50:14.trading partners, and in the end all they have done is pretend to give

:50:15. > :50:20.themselves powers which they already possessed. This statement is

:50:21. > :50:26.windowdressing. It is face-saving by a government that topped a big and

:50:27. > :50:34.backed down with a whimper. The Secretary of State should explain

:50:35. > :50:37.whether he has the new technology, particularly bad storage technology

:50:38. > :50:43.and energy efficiency measures, to manage the electricity supply to

:50:44. > :50:52.reduce a need for baseload supply. I think he has concluded, has he not?

:50:53. > :50:55.His time is up. The honourable gentleman raised a number of points,

:50:56. > :51:01.a large number of points, and I will address them. I hope we share the

:51:02. > :51:05.view that a confident long-term energy policy is vital to ensuring

:51:06. > :51:12.that people have access to securing energy that is affordable and clean,

:51:13. > :51:16.and we should be a world leader in these industries, but I hope he will

:51:17. > :51:20.not think it churlish of me to point out that it was the complete absence

:51:21. > :51:26.of a long-term energy policy during the 13 years in which Labour were in

:51:27. > :51:31.government in which our nuclear fleet was known to be coming to the

:51:32. > :51:36.end of its life and no decision was taken to replace them. It has fallen

:51:37. > :51:42.to this government to make the long term decisions for the security of

:51:43. > :51:47.this country. And instead of the approach of making like the ostrich

:51:48. > :51:52.and hoping the problem will go away, this government is looking to the

:51:53. > :51:58.future, providing the upgrade to the energy security we need. In terms of

:51:59. > :52:04.his position today, I'm afraid I am as confused by it as ever. His

:52:05. > :52:08.position is no more credible. He seemed to be criticising the Prime

:52:09. > :52:12.Minister and the government for taking the serious decision to

:52:13. > :52:19.review the components of a very important deal, that seems to be the

:52:20. > :52:26.input of his intervention. He said that this has damaged confidence,

:52:27. > :52:30.but when the announcement was made on the 29th of July, the honourable

:52:31. > :52:35.gentleman told the BBC, I am hoping that what the government will do is

:52:36. > :52:41.to take two to three months to seriously review it. So much for the

:52:42. > :52:45.suggestion that we should not have had this review in the first place.

:52:46. > :52:50.Mind you, I am not sure what the purpose of this two or three months

:52:51. > :52:53.would be because the very same day, as I have it, he said that he had

:52:54. > :53:02.already made up his mind, he said that he would not scrap the

:53:03. > :53:05.proposal, because he welcomes the jobs and electricity this will

:53:06. > :53:14.produce for the nation. Saw this honourable member was urging the

:53:15. > :53:18.public to take -- government to take longer to discuss. The approach this

:53:19. > :53:27.government has taken I think is marked. The point he raises, in

:53:28. > :53:31.terms of the powers under the enterprise act, they are subject to

:53:32. > :53:35.thresholds, takeover threshold, and we're making sure any change in

:53:36. > :53:41.ownership or control of whatever size will be covered if a national

:53:42. > :53:52.security test, which is sensible. On the point of Hinkley Point, it was

:53:53. > :53:57.the case until we had propose these changes to the contract, that EDF

:53:58. > :54:02.was at liberty to sell its majority stake in this very important

:54:03. > :54:05.investment without even needing to have the permission of the UK

:54:06. > :54:12.Government, so it seems to me no more than sensible and prudent to

:54:13. > :54:14.have agreed with EDF that they should be the consent the British

:54:15. > :54:22.Government required. I am surprised the honourable

:54:23. > :54:26.gentleman, who I would have thought would take a prudent view of matters

:54:27. > :54:30.of national security, seems to suggest, it is not clear what he is

:54:31. > :54:34.suggesting, that we not make these changes when we come to debate these

:54:35. > :54:38.things in future, he will set out whether he opposes the measures

:54:39. > :54:44.taken to safeguard and entrench the same kind of regime for national

:54:45. > :54:48.security that we have in this country that other advanced

:54:49. > :54:51.economies enjoyed. In terms of future investments, I was clear in

:54:52. > :54:55.my statement, this is the first of what we hoped would be a series of

:54:56. > :55:02.nuclear investments, it is important we replace the 20% of power

:55:03. > :55:08.generated by nuclear power with another contribution to a diverse

:55:09. > :55:10.energy mix and in so doing we are creating new jobs, new

:55:11. > :55:18.opportunities, major advances for the UK economy. I welcome proposals

:55:19. > :55:28.to make it more difficult for foreign interest, specialised

:55:29. > :55:36.nationalised interest, to buy our future power. Would it be more

:55:37. > :55:39.prudent for Treasury investors rather than foreign investors who

:55:40. > :55:43.will now be able to take enormous sums out of our country with 25

:55:44. > :55:47.years or more while this project is up and running which is a cost on

:55:48. > :55:52.the balance of payments that we don't really want. I welcome

:55:53. > :55:58.overseas investment of ?18 billion into the UK economy. I hope we

:55:59. > :56:04.develop our nuclear programme and the skills and supply chain prosper

:56:05. > :56:09.so that there will be British companies that will invest in the

:56:10. > :56:16.various parts of the supply chain of new nuclear power, we expect that to

:56:17. > :56:22.happen, 64% of the value going to UK companies. But I think it is an

:56:23. > :56:27.important part of the deal that the consumer and the tax payer will not

:56:28. > :56:33.pay a penny for the construction costs unless and until its generate

:56:34. > :56:37.electricity. Knowing the record that there has been of cost overruns and

:56:38. > :56:42.delays to new nuclear power stations, I think it is prudent that

:56:43. > :56:49.the risk is held by the investors rather than by the taxpayer in this

:56:50. > :56:52.case. I thank the Secretary of State for the advanced copy of the

:56:53. > :56:55.statement and the energy Minister for the courtesy call this morning

:56:56. > :56:58.to explain the Government's decision and I welcome the fact that we are

:56:59. > :57:02.having this statement before the recess to allow the opportunity for

:57:03. > :57:08.questions. I think it is unfortunate that the Government has decided to

:57:09. > :57:10.take the gamble with Hinckley. There right improvements that the

:57:11. > :57:16.Secretary of State has outlined but the deal still remains a rotten one.

:57:17. > :57:28.The ?30 billion that it will cost the bill payer, he may say

:57:29. > :57:32.that the risk is with EDF and the construction companies, but, as

:57:33. > :57:35.Berkeley outlined, 25% over budget and four years late and it will

:57:36. > :57:39.still make a profit. That will be at the expense of the bill payer. If we

:57:40. > :57:44.do not pay a penny until it is blocked, or if it is built late,

:57:45. > :57:48.what fills the gap? Coal is due to come off the system by 2025 when

:57:49. > :57:54.this is meant to come on, if that gap is five years, what will fill it

:57:55. > :58:00.and at what cost? I think the cost of this project, probably the single

:58:01. > :58:05.most expensive object in history, is too much. But what concerns me is

:58:06. > :58:09.the opportunity cost that we have here, because we cannot spend the

:58:10. > :58:13.money twice, we cannot have the engineers working on things twice

:58:14. > :58:17.and we cannot produce the electricity to be consumed twice and

:58:18. > :58:20.we could spend this money better, we could use our expertise better and

:58:21. > :58:25.use it to develop an industrial strategy which this Government has

:58:26. > :58:27.said is part of its new strategy. But that industrial strategy will

:58:28. > :58:53.mean foreign ownership, foreign investment and foreign profit, and

:58:54. > :58:55.instead we could be developing home-grown industries that would see

:58:56. > :58:57.our country flourish, investing in clean carbon capture, investing in

:58:58. > :58:59.offshore wind, investing in storage, investing in solar. These things

:59:00. > :59:02.would all be better spent. Can I ask the Minister to invest in the energy

:59:03. > :59:05.of the future, not the energy of the past? I am grateful for the

:59:06. > :59:07.courteous words. He talks about investing in future energy sources

:59:08. > :59:11.rather than the past. I gently point out to him that, given the SNP's

:59:12. > :59:14.record of energy forecasts in recent months, that perhaps they might keep

:59:15. > :59:20.their crystal balls to themselves, if I can put it that way. In terms

:59:21. > :59:26.of understanding the injunction that the honourable gentleman Gibbs to

:59:27. > :59:31.investors, it is very important, and he will know that Scotland has a

:59:32. > :59:36.high proportion of renewable investment, but I am confused by his

:59:37. > :59:40.party's position on this because the SNP, as I understand it, has stood

:59:41. > :59:44.on a platform of nuclear free Scotland but it seems to be with

:59:45. > :59:51.their fingers crossed behind their back because they are happy to rely

:59:52. > :59:54.on the two nuclear power stations functioning in Scotland that are

:59:55. > :59:58.producing low carbon electricity. His former leader of the party road

:59:59. > :00:05.to EDF to say that he was happy to extend the life of the two power

:00:06. > :00:08.plants well into the 2020s. He wants to condemn his cake and eat it and

:00:09. > :00:13.then have another slice, it seems to me. In terms of the point that he

:00:14. > :00:20.made about overseas investment, we want to attract overseas investment

:00:21. > :00:27.as a vote of confidence in this country that investors are working

:00:28. > :00:30.with us to have this major upgrade of our infrastructure, we welcome

:00:31. > :00:36.that across different sectors. He is wrong is that this is at the expense

:00:37. > :00:41.of opportunities that we have in this country, because one of the

:00:42. > :00:48.features of this deal is it does not burden the public balance sheet, we

:00:49. > :00:55.have been wise to make sure that the UK balance sheet remains able to

:00:56. > :00:58.support other investments. With your indulgence, could I thank the

:00:59. > :01:00.Secretary of State and my right honourable friend the Prime Minister

:01:01. > :01:07.for making exactly the right decision and how important it is for

:01:08. > :01:10.the West Somerset constituency. I invite the Secretary of State to

:01:11. > :01:15.come down as soon as he can to visit the Hinkley Point the power station

:01:16. > :01:19.and said that could he look with some urgency at the nuclear college

:01:20. > :01:23.that we need to build with some urgency but also further to my

:01:24. > :01:27.letter which I sent him from the LEP that we need the last bit of the

:01:28. > :01:31.funding to make sure that the infrastructure to deal with this in

:01:32. > :01:36.the local area is up to scratch so that we can deliver this power plant

:01:37. > :01:40.on time, on budget for the benefit of the United Kingdom. Can I return

:01:41. > :01:43.the complement and thank my honourable friend for his

:01:44. > :01:54.level-headedness and patience while this review has been conducted? It

:01:55. > :01:57.is an extremely important investment for his area, I am looking forward

:01:58. > :02:00.greatly to coming with him to visit Hinckley, and he is right that

:02:01. > :02:05.investments such as the college that will provide the skills that are

:02:06. > :02:08.going to charge ahead the whole of the south-west and indeed the rest

:02:09. > :02:12.of the country, the supply chain extends to all part of the United

:02:13. > :02:18.Kingdom, and my honourable friend. The coaster will also be a

:02:19. > :02:21.beneficiary in this. It requires an upgrade in terms of local

:02:22. > :02:27.infrastructure and I will respond to the LEP on that. I had a positive

:02:28. > :02:31.conversation with the Somerset Chamber of Commerce earlier this

:02:32. > :02:36.week, who were very clear that the benefits of what was then the

:02:37. > :02:43.proposal would be considerable, game changing, for some. He will be aware

:02:44. > :02:46.that Britain's two most respected economy and finance publications,

:02:47. > :02:50.the financial Times and the Economist, have come out strongly

:02:51. > :02:55.against Hinkley C on value for money and energy grounds, with the

:02:56. > :02:59.Economist describing it last month as a white elephant before it is

:03:00. > :03:03.even built. Can he confirmed that nothing he has announced today is an

:03:04. > :03:06.improvement on the dreadful deal negotiated by the former Chancellor

:03:07. > :03:11.on guaranteed price, absolutely dreadful. I don't agree with the

:03:12. > :03:17.honourable gentleman, I think it is a good deal, it secures 70% of our

:03:18. > :03:23.energy into the future, and it is incumbent on him and his Honourable

:03:24. > :03:25.Friends to say that, given the 20% of nuclear capacity will be

:03:26. > :03:29.decommissioned over the next ten years, how will they replace it if

:03:30. > :03:32.they are not forward-looking and making positive decisions such as we

:03:33. > :03:37.have made? I welcome the statement which is good news for the energy

:03:38. > :03:43.sector and my constituents in Bradwell on Sea. Can I assure him

:03:44. > :03:46.that my constituents welcome the prospect of Chinese investment in

:03:47. > :03:49.the Maldon district where there has been a long history of nuclear power

:03:50. > :03:55.generation and does he agree that any future power station will be

:03:56. > :04:00.regulated by the UK inspectorate, staffed by British employees, and

:04:01. > :04:09.that the security evaluation centre which has technology supplied by

:04:10. > :04:14.Huawei set a good precedent for any security concerns? He is absolutely

:04:15. > :04:18.right and it seems to me important that we welcome overseas investment

:04:19. > :04:21.but that we should have a regime and set of powers that other advanced

:04:22. > :04:28.economies benefit from, that is something that I think countries

:04:29. > :04:33.would expect to have and that is what we will have as a result of

:04:34. > :04:37.these changes. Having pressed the pause button, why is the Secretary

:04:38. > :04:41.of State now pressing the fast forward button? Doesn't he recognise

:04:42. > :04:46.that the project does not represent value for money as the FT have

:04:47. > :04:50.pointed out? Does he accept the cost to consumers has gone from six to 30

:04:51. > :04:54.billion and that is now his Government are willing to put in

:04:55. > :04:57.public subsidy is something that they said under coalition would not

:04:58. > :05:03.happen, and this happening at a time when the cost of renewables is

:05:04. > :05:08.plummeting? Mr Speaker, I have said the construction cost is entirely

:05:09. > :05:12.financed by the private investors in this site, and again I think it is

:05:13. > :05:18.important that we do have a long-term consistent approach to

:05:19. > :05:23.energy policy, and I think insofar as this can be cross-party, that is

:05:24. > :05:26.beneficial. It is especially ironic that two Liberal Democrat Energy

:05:27. > :05:31.Secretary were closely involved in the negotiation of this deal, we

:05:32. > :05:36.have a different view already. Could my right honourable friend confirm

:05:37. > :05:41.that at the end of its life this new power plant well have generated the

:05:42. > :05:44.most expensive energy in the history of energy generation, and can he

:05:45. > :05:48.tell us whether he agrees with the National audit office that in its

:05:49. > :05:53.lifetime consumers will have ended up subsidising EDF to the tune of

:05:54. > :05:56.?30 billion, and can he tell us what will happen to the mountains of

:05:57. > :06:02.nuclear waste the plant will generate? What I would say is that

:06:03. > :06:10.the securing for 60 years of a reliable source of energy is a good

:06:11. > :06:14.investment in the future of stability for our energy supplies,

:06:15. > :06:18.and that is worth having. It is impossible to know what the

:06:19. > :06:22.alternatives would be during that time but we have seen a volatile

:06:23. > :06:25.energy prices. So Winston Churchill's principles on energy

:06:26. > :06:31.security was that diversity and diversity alone was the key. I think

:06:32. > :06:36.that is the right approach. When it comes to decommissioning, as I said

:06:37. > :06:42.in my earlier answer, this is provided for explicitly in the

:06:43. > :06:46.contract. EDF said that this will mean 1500 jobs at offices in Bristol

:06:47. > :06:50.as well as those associated with the plant, I am going down to Hinckley

:06:51. > :07:31.on Monday to discuss that, but these are incredibly

:07:32. > :07:35.expensive jobs given what we have heard about the deal. Does the

:07:36. > :07:37.Minister really think this is value for money and would it not be better

:07:38. > :07:40.spent investing in the renewable sector which would also mean jobs in

:07:41. > :07:43.the south-west? I do and I am confused as to the demeanour of the

:07:44. > :07:45.party opposite to it seemed in the rather confusing reply of the shadow

:07:46. > :07:48.Minister to be welcoming the project going ahead. Certainly the trade

:07:49. > :07:50.unions in the south-west and across the country, which I would imagine

:07:51. > :07:52.the honourable lady has been speaking to, are very positive. The

:07:53. > :07:55.National Secretary for energy for the GMB said giving the thumbs up to

:07:56. > :07:58.Hinckley is vital to fill the great hole in the UK's energy supply of

:07:59. > :08:00.the TUC has welcomed this. When she goes back to her constituency this

:08:01. > :08:03.weekend she might talk to some of the union to some of the unions who

:08:04. > :08:06.are delighted on behalf of Frances O'Grady of the TUC has welcomed

:08:07. > :08:08.this. When she goes back to her constituency this weekend she might

:08:09. > :08:11.talk to some of the unions who are delighted on behalf of their can I

:08:12. > :08:13.welcome this announcement that it brings ?465 million of contracts to

:08:14. > :08:15.south-west businesses and a 4 billion boost to the south-west

:08:16. > :08:18.fleet of nuclear power stations from the 1960s and 70s that will close

:08:19. > :08:21.over the next ten years and these decisions are not a bad either all,

:08:22. > :08:23.we need both. That is why long-term planning is essential. We have would

:08:24. > :08:26.the Minister agree that we have to look at these decisions in context

:08:27. > :08:29.and the fact that we have a fleet of nuclear power stations from the

:08:30. > :08:31.1960s and 70s that will close over the next ten years and these

:08:32. > :08:33.decisions are not about either all, we need both. That is why long-term

:08:34. > :08:46.planning is essential. EDF my constituency has an acute

:08:47. > :08:49.power station which will hopefully be built in the future which is

:08:50. > :08:53.important for economic development, can he assure me that the future

:08:54. > :08:58.renewable programme will not be beset by delay after delay after

:08:59. > :09:02.delay? One of the reasons we are so keen to inaugurate this new

:09:03. > :09:07.programme nuclear engineering in this country is to be able to

:09:08. > :09:11.replace the nuclear power stations that are being decommissioned. To

:09:12. > :09:16.build inconsistencies like hers on the skills that can make a valuable

:09:17. > :09:25.contribution to local life and the National economy. I welcome the

:09:26. > :09:29.building of the new fleet of nuclear power stations, the opportunity

:09:30. > :09:33.provides for British manufacturing, will my right honourable friend do

:09:34. > :09:34.what he can to ensure that in these deals, we will have the best of

:09:35. > :09:53.British? 64% of the value by content will be

:09:54. > :09:56.spent with UK companies which shows the tangible benefits to the whole

:09:57. > :10:01.economy of this programme. The minister said that the Hinkley

:10:02. > :10:06.decision wouldn't burden the national balance sheet. Would he

:10:07. > :10:10.clarify the status of the offer made by the previous Chancellor of the

:10:11. > :10:14.Exchequer to give EDF a Treasury guarantee of ?2 billion to

:10:15. > :10:21.supplement the company's liquidity. An offer that puts the taxpayer at

:10:22. > :10:25.risk? I am delighted to answer that question. EDF have confirmed to me

:10:26. > :10:29.they will not be taking up that ?2 billion guarantee so that the

:10:30. > :10:36.taxpayer is fully in selected from the costs of construction. I welcome

:10:37. > :10:41.his statement today and will he confirm that he will continue to

:10:42. > :10:46.work with businesses to make sure we build on this nuclear partnership to

:10:47. > :10:54.attract future investment in the UK? I will indeed. We do want to have

:10:55. > :10:59.good investment opportunities for countries around the world and

:11:00. > :11:07.China, across the United Kingdom, has been viable source of investment

:11:08. > :11:10.and it is important we build on it. In light of the announcement today,

:11:11. > :11:13.is the Secretary of State now admitting that when the government

:11:14. > :11:18.entered into the original contract, they failed to protect national

:11:19. > :11:23.security and critical infrastructure? What I would say to

:11:24. > :11:26.the honourable lady, despite the injunction of her colleague on the

:11:27. > :11:30.front bench is that taking the opportunity to seriously review

:11:31. > :11:36.before signatures were given, has allowed us to improve the security

:11:37. > :11:42.of the arrangements. That seems to be a good thing that I hope she will

:11:43. > :11:47.welcome. The Secretary of State is right to point out that nuclear

:11:48. > :11:50.energy provides a valuable part of UK's energy security but that is

:11:51. > :11:54.only provided we have the fuel to put in them. The fuel for the UK

:11:55. > :11:58.reactors are made in my constituency, Candy Secretary of

:11:59. > :12:05.State assure me that efforts will be made to ensure that nuclear fuel

:12:06. > :12:12.reactors from the UK will be made from UK fuel? I will visit his

:12:13. > :12:18.constituency to see myself the production. I very much welcome the

:12:19. > :12:20.review but I have to say I am astonished that the review of the

:12:21. > :12:30.strike price was not part of that, which will rise to ?120 megawatt per

:12:31. > :12:34.hour rising with inflation. Can I ask if a serious examination of the

:12:35. > :12:40.cost for Bill payers was part of the review? Of course, Mr Speaker, we

:12:41. > :12:44.looked at every component part. For a new nuclear power station, the

:12:45. > :12:47.first for a generation in this country come to have it constructed

:12:48. > :12:52.at no risk to the taxpayer or the bill payer is a considerable

:12:53. > :12:59.achievement. It represents good value. This is good news for my

:13:00. > :13:03.constituency as it means we will have a third nuclear power station

:13:04. > :13:08.built, good news travels fast. I have at the local radio station

:13:09. > :13:13.desperate to get an interview and to congratulate the Secretary of State

:13:14. > :13:17.on the hard work he has done for my constituency. Could we meet together

:13:18. > :13:25.shortly to have a meeting to speed up the five proposed reactions --

:13:26. > :13:28.reactors in the future? I would be very happy to meet my honourable

:13:29. > :13:37.friend and I considered the invitation accept it. Mr Speaker, we

:13:38. > :13:45.have an excellent Secretary of State and he has made a very full

:13:46. > :13:51.statement. But, he gave details to the opposition spokesman and the SNP

:13:52. > :13:55.statement but he also gave it in advance to the BBC. I read all of

:13:56. > :14:02.this on the BBC website. That is not how this house works. It may be that

:14:03. > :14:06.spin doctors are still prevalent in departments, that has got to stop.

:14:07. > :14:09.The house has to be informed first. And would-be secretary agreed that

:14:10. > :14:15.that is the convention of this house? I understand the point he

:14:16. > :14:20.makes. I hope he will concede that I have come to the house at the

:14:21. > :14:25.earliest opportunity. Decisions like this have consequences for financial

:14:26. > :14:29.markets. It is the norm at the opening of the markets to disclose.

:14:30. > :14:34.He can be absolutely assured and I am sure he will accept this, that my

:14:35. > :14:38.sense of the possibility to this house is very clear in my mind. But

:14:39. > :14:42.we need to have an orderly conduct of business when it comes to

:14:43. > :14:50.important implications to the financial markets. Mr Speaker, I

:14:51. > :14:53.welcome the announcement on golden shares and I very much support what

:14:54. > :14:58.my right honourable friend the Wokingham said about the future for

:14:59. > :15:01.British investment, perhaps through a UK investment bank and UK pension

:15:02. > :15:06.funds. Can he confirm to me where the currency risk, but Italy on the

:15:07. > :15:14.subsidy payments in the future and out of the CFTs will arise? The

:15:15. > :15:23.contract is expressed in pounds. The construction risk is entirely with

:15:24. > :15:28.the investors. I welcome the long-term investment in low carbon

:15:29. > :15:34.energy and the 25,000 jobs this will create. Can the Secretary of State

:15:35. > :15:39.confirm EDF's admit to local jobs and small and medium-sized

:15:40. > :15:44.businesses in the supply chain such as James Fisher nuclear in my

:15:45. > :15:47.constituency? I am sure that particular firm will attest to that.

:15:48. > :15:54.The Somerset Chamber of Commerce one very clear that orders had already

:15:55. > :16:01.been placed during the period of preparation of the site and it has

:16:02. > :16:04.been beneficial to that county. Thank you Mr Speaker, this is

:16:05. > :16:09.obviously a massive infrastructure project and I welcome what he says

:16:10. > :16:13.about the opportunities for the UK supply chains and I hope that will

:16:14. > :16:16.extend to the steel industry and I would strongly urge the Secretary of

:16:17. > :16:21.State to get out and make the case that order of the steel used in this

:16:22. > :16:28.project should be British. Can I put in a particular plug for Corby.

:16:29. > :16:33.Which are of excellent quality I know. The commitment EDF have given

:16:34. > :16:37.me that 64% by value of the work will be with UK firms will be of

:16:38. > :16:44.particular benefit to firms such as the one he mentions and the supply

:16:45. > :16:50.chain across the country. I am grateful to be Secretary of State,

:16:51. > :16:55.point of order, Mr Andrew Small. In the last ten minutes, a consultation

:16:56. > :17:04.document has been published, I am grateful that it has been got for

:17:05. > :17:07.me. Camberwell mitigates court, there is no statement or other

:17:08. > :17:14.notice in relation to the closure. These things are often published

:17:15. > :17:18.late in the day, this is the court that serves 600,000 people in London

:17:19. > :17:21.and earlier in June this year was told we needed the extra capacity

:17:22. > :17:26.there. Should there not be an opportunity for members to raise

:17:27. > :17:29.these important issues locally in chamber by the time the house sits

:17:30. > :17:35.again, the consultation period will be more than half over. Should it

:17:36. > :17:39.not deal with members on a more courteous basis? Won the short

:17:40. > :17:44.answer is yes. It would be courteous if an announcement of this kind

:17:45. > :17:50.would have been made at an earlier point and not very shortly before

:17:51. > :17:53.the house ceases to sit with minimal opportunity for the honourable

:17:54. > :17:57.gentleman in Parliament returns to explore the matter. What I would

:17:58. > :18:03.suggest to him is that he used the remaining time he has today to look

:18:04. > :18:07.at options for asking parliamentary questions or to schedule a debate on

:18:08. > :18:11.this important matter. He would have every prospect of securing a debate.

:18:12. > :18:16.Although it would be at a later point than he would wish, I guess it

:18:17. > :18:19.would be better than nothing. But I think ministers will take account of

:18:20. > :18:25.what he says. This can be a concern felt by members on both sides of the

:18:26. > :18:30.house. And it isn't clever, I think this is my point, it is not clever

:18:31. > :18:35.when ministers behave in this way. If it is done without malice or

:18:36. > :18:41.forethought then it is simply thoughtless. If it is done on the

:18:42. > :18:45.basis of knowing that it will disadvantage or inconvenience a

:18:46. > :18:49.member it is rank inconsiderate and disrespectful. Merely to the member

:18:50. > :18:57.at at least as importantly, to his constituents. Point of order. Mr

:18:58. > :19:03.Speaker, you will be aware this house has increasingly discussed the

:19:04. > :19:09.planned cuts to social housing. In an opposition Day debate, called by

:19:10. > :19:15.myself on the 20th of July, the government pledged to look again at

:19:16. > :19:19.plans to cap local housing allowance and at the 1% housing benefit cut

:19:20. > :19:23.that would also affect supported housing. Today, the government has

:19:24. > :19:30.announced by written statement that they intend to defer the decision on

:19:31. > :19:34.the LH a cap until 2019 but will be going ahead with the cut to

:19:35. > :19:39.supported housing providers from next April. Is it not an affront to

:19:40. > :19:43.this house Mr Speaker and to all members of this house, who have

:19:44. > :19:47.expressed their concerns about these plans, for the Minister not to come

:19:48. > :19:52.to this place with an oral statement, sticking it out yet

:19:53. > :19:58.again, the day before our recess commences? Is it also not an insult

:19:59. > :20:01.to the tens of thousands of vulnerable people, women who have

:20:02. > :20:07.suffered domestic violence, older people, disabled people, former

:20:08. > :20:11.veterans, yet again been plunged into uncertainty and insecurity. Mr

:20:12. > :20:16.Speaker, I seek your guidance on how members on all sides of the house

:20:17. > :20:21.can hold this government and their executive to account and question

:20:22. > :20:25.the Minister on this proposal is in person and in detail? Won I am

:20:26. > :20:28.grateful for the point of order, I can entirely understand the

:20:29. > :20:33.disappointment and irritation about this matter. I hope it will be

:20:34. > :20:37.possible when we return from the conference recess for this matter to

:20:38. > :20:41.be explored on the floor of the house. There are a number of

:20:42. > :20:44.possibilities in that regard. It is a matter of judgment for the

:20:45. > :20:49.government whether a ministerial statement should be made orally or

:20:50. > :20:56.in writing. While I understand her view of this matter, I would just

:20:57. > :20:59.mention that there were two oral statements today as well as business

:21:00. > :21:03.questions. I have no way of knowing what exchanges took place within the

:21:04. > :21:09.government but it is by no means unknown for a minister to want or to

:21:10. > :21:14.be prepared to make an oral statement but to be prevented from

:21:15. > :21:18.doing so because of competing priorities. I have no idea whether

:21:19. > :21:21.that is the case in this instance, I would simply say in response to her

:21:22. > :21:29.request for guidance that she can pursue the matter on the conventions

:21:30. > :21:32.for questions in October, I appreciate this is a considerable

:21:33. > :21:36.time away but it is one possibility. There are other forms of question

:21:37. > :21:40.that can take place in because of the day, as she knows and it is open

:21:41. > :21:45.to the opposition to choose this matter for debate on a future

:21:46. > :21:49.opposition day. If she does find a way to pursue the matter in as far

:21:50. > :21:52.as it is proper and the chair will be her friend in that process and

:21:53. > :21:58.meanwhile, she has at least put her concern and extreme dissatisfaction

:21:59. > :22:02.on the record. Point of order Mr John Healey. Further to that point

:22:03. > :22:06.of order and I am grateful for the remarks he made to the house, were

:22:07. > :22:09.you given any indication that ministers were considering an oral

:22:10. > :22:14.statement on the consequences of their cuts to housing benefits for

:22:15. > :22:18.many thousands of vulnerable people in supported housing. This written

:22:19. > :22:22.statement we have had instead raises more questions than it answers. The

:22:23. > :22:27.policy is delayed but the cuts will go ahead. There is no figure on the

:22:28. > :22:32.new funding pledge but the budget scored the so-called savings at ?990

:22:33. > :22:36.million. And the new fund the ministers promised is similar to

:22:37. > :22:45.that which has been cut in half the supported peoples fund by more than

:22:46. > :22:48.half since 2010. The announcement was smuggled out in the small print

:22:49. > :22:54.of the Autumn Statement, the announcement today is very in the

:22:55. > :22:58.small print of a long written ministerial statement. What help can

:22:59. > :23:01.you Mr Speaker give the house to make sure that ministers are

:23:02. > :23:07.properly held to account for the assertions in this house? If there

:23:08. > :23:12.has been no opportunity to explore the matter in the chamber, before

:23:13. > :23:18.the recess, and we return in October, there would be an early

:23:19. > :23:22.opportunity at that point. I have already referenced one of those

:23:23. > :23:27.opportunities which has already provided for in the known timetable

:23:28. > :23:34.of oral questions. If it is felt strongly by a member or possibly by

:23:35. > :23:40.a number of members, that the matter warrants a more thorough scrutiny

:23:41. > :23:46.than a couple of questions at monthly questions would allow, I

:23:47. > :23:50.would certainly be open to that possibility. The Right Honourable

:23:51. > :23:53.gentleman asks me if I have had any indication that ministers have been

:23:54. > :24:01.planning to make an oral statement on this matter, and I must answer

:24:02. > :24:05.that, no. I have received no such notification but in fairness, it is

:24:06. > :24:10.not unreasonable for me to observe that absence of evidence does not

:24:11. > :24:15.constitute evidence of absence. We will leave it there for now. I will

:24:16. > :24:22.come, I am saving him up. Point of order Mr Jim Fitzpatrick.

:24:23. > :24:27.We 19% of our electricity generated by nuclear power. If we don't renew

:24:28. > :24:32.it it will fall to 2% by 2030. It is prudent to get on with replacing

:24:33. > :24:38.last week I stated baritones of a Stanley are responsible for the

:24:39. > :24:43.decision not to Morgan Stanley are responsible for the decision provide

:24:44. > :24:46.fixed electrical power cruise ships. I have apologised to Barrett and

:24:47. > :24:50.have written to Morgan Stanley and am grateful for the opportunity to

:24:51. > :24:53.set the record straight. I thank the honourable gentleman, he has set the

:24:54. > :24:58.record straight and has done so with the courtesy for which he is

:24:59. > :25:00.renowned in all parts of the hounds cruise ships. I have apologised to

:25:01. > :25:03.Barrett and have written to Morgan Stanley and am grateful for the

:25:04. > :25:04.opportunity to set the record straight. I thank the honourable

:25:05. > :25:07.gentleman, you set the record straight and has done so with the

:25:08. > :25:11.courtesy for which he is renowned in all parts of the Mr Speaker, you may

:25:12. > :25:13.be aware that in July the person who is now the Secretary for exiting the

:25:14. > :25:16.European on September nine, the Prime Minister would have triggered

:25:17. > :25:20.a large round of global trade deals with our most favourable trade

:25:21. > :25:25.partners. Do you think, bearing in mind there was no statement on the

:25:26. > :25:28.9th of September, that in fact this should be facilitated so that he

:25:29. > :25:32.could come to the House to set out what progress has been made on those

:25:33. > :25:36.trade deals, perhaps lists the countries with whom they have been

:25:37. > :25:41.initiated, and if he could deliver on the timescale he promised which

:25:42. > :25:48.would be completed between the next 12 and 24 months. I am not sure

:25:49. > :25:52.there is any mechanism for securing satisfaction for the honourable

:25:53. > :25:59.gentleman today. It may be that the right honourable gentleman, whom I

:26:00. > :26:02.think he has in mind, the Secretary of State for exiting the European

:26:03. > :26:09.Union, would be enthusiastic beyond words about the possibility of

:26:10. > :26:13.appearing before the House and engaging with and responding to the

:26:14. > :26:16.honourable gentleman but I think the backbench business committee, under

:26:17. > :26:21.whose auspices two debates are about to take place, may take a different

:26:22. > :26:26.view. I know that he is an eager and assiduous member of Parliament. I

:26:27. > :26:30.think it unlikely that he will spend all of the conference recess

:26:31. > :26:35.reflecting on this matter, it would be a bit sad if he were to do so,

:26:36. > :26:41.but if he comes back in October and remains similarly vexed and anxious

:26:42. > :26:45.for clarity, then I hope he will use the mechanisms that are available to

:26:46. > :26:49.him. I think we had better leave it there for now, we have had a

:26:50. > :26:54.considerable feast of points of order today and we move now to the

:26:55. > :26:59.presentation of the bill with the secretary Jeremy Hunt.

:27:00. > :27:04.Health service medical supplies costs Bill, second reading, what

:27:05. > :27:10.day? Monday the 10th of October. Thank you. Colleagues, we come to

:27:11. > :27:13.the first of our two backbench business committee inspired debates

:27:14. > :27:19.and therefore to the motion on domestic abuse victims in family law

:27:20. > :27:29.courts. To move the motion, I call Angela Smith. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

:27:30. > :27:32.I beg to move the motion as on the order paper, domestic abuse victims

:27:33. > :27:37.in family courts. Can I make clear at the beginning that I will only

:27:38. > :27:41.take two interventions at the most because of the heavily subscribed

:27:42. > :27:46.nature of this debate, and I want people to have the time to speak.

:27:47. > :27:51.The debate today isn't really about courts and laws and statutory

:27:52. > :27:56.agencies. This debate is about children. Or rather it is about

:27:57. > :28:00.children whose mothers have been subject to domestic abuse and who

:28:01. > :28:06.themselves have become victims of violent and coercive fathers. This

:28:07. > :28:10.debate in particular is about the 19 children who have died at the hands

:28:11. > :28:15.of their fathers over the last ten years. All of whom had access to

:28:16. > :28:20.their children through formal or informal child contact arrangements.

:28:21. > :28:26.With the goodwill of the House, I want to dedicate the first part of

:28:27. > :28:34.my speech to telling the story of Clive Russell, my constituent. Bear

:28:35. > :28:40.with me. -- Claire Russell. It had just 15 minutes in October 2014 for

:28:41. > :28:45.my life and heart to be broken completely beyond repair. I had

:28:46. > :28:48.warned those involved with my case that my happy, funny boys would be

:28:49. > :28:56.killed by their own father. I was right. My boys were both with their

:28:57. > :29:04.father on that October day, and, at around 6:30pm, he enticed Paul and

:29:05. > :29:08.jack up into the attic with the promise of trains and track to build

:29:09. > :29:17.a model railway. When the boys were in the attic, he lit 16 separate

:29:18. > :29:22.fires around the House, which he had barricaded. So my sons could not get

:29:23. > :29:29.out and the firemen could not get in. Only 15 minutes later, the

:29:30. > :29:33.doorbell rang at my mums. We were staying there temporarily after the

:29:34. > :29:38.separation. It is the boys, they must be early, my mum said, but I

:29:39. > :29:43.knew that was not right. The boys would have run into the House and

:29:44. > :29:48.straight into my arms. They always did after a visit to their dad, I

:29:49. > :29:53.they were frightened of him, he was a perpetrator of domestic abuse. The

:29:54. > :29:58.agencies involved in our case knew this. I opened the door, blue lights

:29:59. > :30:02.were flashing. There has been an incident at your former home, the

:30:03. > :30:08.boys have been involved in a fire. Running into the hospital, the first

:30:09. > :30:13.thing I saw was Paul receiving CPR. Doctor drenched in sweat and

:30:14. > :30:23.exhausted told me they were withdrawing treatment. I held Paul

:30:24. > :30:35.in my arms. I begged him to try, to stay, he looked tunnelling, smiled,

:30:36. > :30:41.and the lies left his eyes. Then my boys were taken out of my arms and

:30:42. > :30:44.into another room. There was no further chants of touching him

:30:45. > :30:54.because his body was part of a serious crime inquiry. Detectives

:30:55. > :30:58.informed me my former husband was suspected of starting the fire and

:30:59. > :31:01.he had died. All this time I was not allowed to see Jack because they

:31:02. > :31:06.were still fighting to save him. Thankfully he never knew that Paul

:31:07. > :31:10.had died. He had tried to save his little brother. Police later

:31:11. > :31:15.disclosed that Jack was still conscious when carried out of the

:31:16. > :31:23.fire and told them, my dad did this, and he did it on purpose. This was

:31:24. > :31:29.taken as his dying testimony. Jack clung to life for five days but his

:31:30. > :31:37.battle was too big for him to fight, his body suffered 56% burns. He,

:31:38. > :31:40.too, died in my arms after suffering cardiac arrest due to the horrific

:31:41. > :31:55.injuries. That is Claire's heartbreaking story

:31:56. > :32:00.but I wanted it on Parliamentary record and now, thank God, it is. It

:32:01. > :32:10.is the testimony of these stories, heard in this chamber, that will

:32:11. > :32:17.engineer the changes we need to think to make sure this does not

:32:18. > :32:21.become another mother's story. Before I move on, I want to pay

:32:22. > :32:28.tribute to Claire. In my 12 years as an MP I have never been asked to

:32:29. > :32:34.intervene in a case like this. No other case has touched me like this.

:32:35. > :32:41.No other constituent has impressed me so much with her bravery and

:32:42. > :32:45.determination to secure something positive out of something so

:32:46. > :32:49.dreadful and I want to pay tribute to the people of Penistone who

:32:50. > :32:52.responded magnificently to her tragedy. Claire's husband cancelled

:32:53. > :32:57.the insurance on the property before you set it on fire. He also did

:32:58. > :33:03.other things I will not go into that effectively left her penniless and

:33:04. > :33:07.without a home. The people of Penistone, led by our wonderful

:33:08. > :33:09.vicar at Saint John's Church, rallied around, raising money to buy

:33:10. > :33:17.somewhere for her to live and pulling together to make her new

:33:18. > :33:24.house into a home. In black, dreadful times, such things matter,

:33:25. > :33:28.and I am incredibly proud of the people I represent in this close,

:33:29. > :33:31.warm-hearted community. Onto the changes that are critical

:33:32. > :33:37.if we are to make sure this never happens again, on to what we need to

:33:38. > :33:42.do to secure Claire's legacy and a legacy for her children, Paul and

:33:43. > :33:46.Jack. The women's aid report I have referred to, 19 child homicide, was

:33:47. > :33:52.published earlier this year, in response to the failure of the

:33:53. > :33:55.family courts to embed in their practice the culture of putting

:33:56. > :33:58.children first... I thank her for giving way, on the

:33:59. > :34:03.point about family Court I think there should be an urgent review

:34:04. > :34:07.because often people giving evidence are not protected by basing their

:34:08. > :34:13.accuser but more importantly a constituent of mine was actually in

:34:14. > :34:17.hospital, a victim of domestic abuse, the abuser got custody of her

:34:18. > :34:21.children, she was not represented in the court, that is one of the

:34:22. > :34:25.reasons I say we need an urgent review of Family Court practices. I

:34:26. > :34:30.completely agree with my honourable friend, and all of this is despite

:34:31. > :34:35.the fact, in 2004, a legal framework and the accompanying guidance was

:34:36. > :34:40.produced to ensure they did so. That legal framework itself was a

:34:41. > :34:45.response to an earlier report by Womens Aid, 29 child homicides, and

:34:46. > :34:48.at its heart was a recognition that the courts needed to develop a new

:34:49. > :34:55.culture of putting children first. The accompanying practice 20 job

:34:56. > :34:59.requires courts to ensure that where domestic abuse has occurred, any

:35:00. > :35:04.child arrangements ordered protect the safety and well-being of the

:35:05. > :35:09.child and the parent with care and are in the best interests of the

:35:10. > :35:14.child. In addition, in 2015, a new criminal offence of controlling all

:35:15. > :35:20.coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship was introduced.

:35:21. > :35:24.Practice 12 itself was amended to reflect this wider definition of

:35:25. > :35:30.domestic abuse. Two developments which are potentially big steps

:35:31. > :35:33.forward. My honourable friend is making an

:35:34. > :35:37.incredibly powerful speech. I have been struck by the number of

:35:38. > :35:41.constituents and other people I have met through my work who have said

:35:42. > :35:44.that as victims, when they have gone to the courts, including Family

:35:45. > :35:49.Court, they have felt they have not been believed and that those who are

:35:50. > :35:53.involved in the judiciary don't fully understand the patterns of

:35:54. > :35:58.domestic abuse and what to believe and who to believe in the courts.

:35:59. > :36:01.Will she agree with me that there is a very important part of this as

:36:02. > :36:06.well which is the training of the cherished -- the judiciary and

:36:07. > :36:15.updating the training to reflect the law. I think, where I want to go to

:36:16. > :36:19.now, is to ask a few questions. What are the limits of the family Court

:36:20. > :36:24.given the tools at their disposal? Why is it breathing so difficult for

:36:25. > :36:29.family courts to tackle this issue? Why is it so hard to put children

:36:30. > :36:33.first? I would suggest, Madam Deputy Speaker, that there are two major

:36:34. > :36:37.reasons. First of all, the ongoing assumption that men who are abusive

:36:38. > :36:44.towards women can nevertheless be good fathers. This relief, this

:36:45. > :36:50.myth, is unbelievably enduring and fires in the face of the evidence.

:36:51. > :36:52.Research indicates that there are many serious and negative impacts

:36:53. > :36:59.for children arriving from domestic abuse. Including children becoming

:37:00. > :37:04.aggressive or conversely over compliant, all becoming withdrawn,

:37:05. > :37:09.anxious and fearful. One study also found that over 34% of under 18 's

:37:10. > :37:13.who had lived with domestic violence had also been abused or neglected by

:37:14. > :37:19.a parent or guardian and I don't see why that should surprise anyone, I

:37:20. > :37:23.really don't see why. Surely, Madam Deputy Speaker, this outdated and

:37:24. > :37:27.discredited way of thinking has no place in our Family Court? Given the

:37:28. > :37:31.ongoing incidents of violence against children and the frequent

:37:32. > :37:35.link with domestic abuse, we need to effectively eradicate this cultural

:37:36. > :37:44.legacy from our Family Court. The second reason I believe is this

:37:45. > :37:47.ongoing failure on the part of the statutory agencies and the Family

:37:48. > :37:50.Court judiciary to understand that domestic abuse frequently involves

:37:51. > :37:55.coercive control. Abuse is about power and control. That is why it is

:37:56. > :37:57.not surprising that fathers who beat up women can also abuse children as

:37:58. > :38:15.well. Physical injury is not the only

:38:16. > :38:19.manifestation of abuse. This is where when separation occurs and a

:38:20. > :38:21.woman removes herself and her children from an intolerable

:38:22. > :38:27.situation, the abusive parent frequently uses family court

:38:28. > :38:32.proceedings as a means of attempting to control and coerce. This brings

:38:33. > :38:40.me back to Claire's story. Her reviews exercised the ultimate

:38:41. > :38:44.control over Claire. Not only did he dragged her to the family court for

:38:45. > :38:49.access to his children, unsupervised access, he went on to murder her

:38:50. > :38:55.children. And in doing that, he has, with one awful heartbreaking

:38:56. > :39:01.criminal act exercised control over Claire for the rest of her life.

:39:02. > :39:07.That should give us pause for thought. Never again will Claire's

:39:08. > :39:14.life either same as her two boys have gone. And we all feel her pain.

:39:15. > :39:20.And we have a duty to act. That is why I have worked with women's aid

:39:21. > :39:27.and many other MPs for this debate day, I pay tribute to women's aid to

:39:28. > :39:29.the work they have done and we have had reports on domestic violence

:39:30. > :39:35.that reflects on what needs to be done. I have not time to go through

:39:36. > :39:39.the recommendations in detail recommended in the report but

:39:40. > :39:44.suffice it to say, they wish to put children first and properly

:39:45. > :39:46.implement a legal framework of practice 12 including the

:39:47. > :39:51.professional training of court staff and the judiciary, as my honourable

:39:52. > :39:58.friend mentioned. An independent Asheville oversight of the increment

:39:59. > :39:59.Asian practice 12. They also include practical measures including

:40:00. > :40:05.designated safe waiting rooms for vulnerable witnesses and separate

:40:06. > :40:09.entrance and exit times. And we all want to see reform of the

:40:10. > :40:14.government's legal aid changes to ensure that representation in the

:40:15. > :40:17.family courts the adequate and sufficient to avoid the current

:40:18. > :40:23.situation which sees abused women cross-examined by their abusers. I

:40:24. > :40:28.note the minister, who has written to me separately, has indicated that

:40:29. > :40:34.the president of the family division has asked Mr Justice, to review

:40:35. > :40:39.practice 12 to see if amendments are needed but we need more than that.

:40:40. > :40:42.The public needs more than that. Indicated by the 38 degrees

:40:43. > :40:48.petition, signed by over 33,000 people. We need to see the Ministry

:40:49. > :40:53.of Justice take action to ensure the legal framework is Rob Elliot

:40:54. > :40:58.implemented. We need to see practical changes to the way the

:40:59. > :41:01.courts work. We need to see resources dedicated to ensuring

:41:02. > :41:05.professional training for court staff and the judiciary. And we need

:41:06. > :41:10.to see the government indicating that it will do all that is

:41:11. > :41:13.necessary to improve the relationships and information

:41:14. > :41:19.sharing between statutory agencies and between those agencies and the

:41:20. > :41:25.family courts. There is a huge delay in Claire's case, Paul and Jack's

:41:26. > :41:29.case. Above all else, for Claire's sake and the sake of all of

:41:30. > :41:34.vulnerable women, we need the government to send out a very clear

:41:35. > :41:37.message, by agreeing to act on today's motion, the government will

:41:38. > :41:44.be sending out a clear message that domestic abuse will be tackled. And

:41:45. > :41:47.that it will be dealt with in all its forms. And that we will not

:41:48. > :41:56.allow our children to be harmed by it. Madam Deputy Speaker, Jack and

:41:57. > :42:01.Paul must not ever be forgotten. Claire wanted their names to be used

:42:02. > :42:08.in a serious case review but the authorities refused. Referring to

:42:09. > :42:15.refer to them as Pete two. Jack and Paul were not Pete two. They were

:42:16. > :42:20.dearly loved boys whose lives were snatched away from them by their

:42:21. > :42:26.violent father. Let us make sure today that Jack and Paul will never

:42:27. > :42:31.be forgotten. Please support the motion on the order paper. The

:42:32. > :42:34.question on the order paper, before I call the next big, I do not want a

:42:35. > :42:40.time limit on this debate but we want to be on the next debate at

:42:41. > :42:45.3:30pm so if frontbenchers have ten minutes including interventions, we

:42:46. > :42:53.will easily get everybody in. Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker and I would

:42:54. > :42:57.like to thank the honourable member for whose power. And has set the

:42:58. > :43:00.context for this bait. And to thank the bank that should bash

:43:01. > :43:09.micro-backbench committee for granting the debate and women's aid,

:43:10. > :43:15.championing the rights of victims of domestic violence. We have very

:43:16. > :43:21.disturbing findings indeed and the government and the judiciary have to

:43:22. > :43:25.listen and they have to act. Every single recommendation in this report

:43:26. > :43:29.needs to be considered. Further child deaths like the tragic case we

:43:30. > :43:34.have just heard about have to be prevented. And the courts made to

:43:35. > :43:38.challenge themselves about their current attitude, their culture and

:43:39. > :43:44.their practice in all the mess the violence cases. We have to be clear

:43:45. > :43:50.that there is priority given to tackling domestic abuse. And I think

:43:51. > :43:55.we have a government that feels that that is a priority. And they have

:43:56. > :44:01.acted, not just spoken. Coercive control is now a new offence in the

:44:02. > :44:05.serious crime act of 2015. It is important that as recommended in the

:44:06. > :44:10.report we are discussing today, that all members of the family court,

:44:11. > :44:19.judiciary and others have specialist training to understand the reality

:44:20. > :44:21.of what that new law means. Does the honourable lady agree that sometimes

:44:22. > :44:28.family courts mistake persistence from fathers over access, going

:44:29. > :44:35.through the courts time and again as an interest in their children rather

:44:36. > :44:38.than an intimidation and bullying of their previous partner?

:44:39. > :44:42.Frighteningly, in the case of my constituency, I have had a worker

:44:43. > :44:46.actually say to children, who are afraid of their father and didn't

:44:47. > :44:49.want to visit, that if they didn't go, their mother would be in deep

:44:50. > :44:54.trouble and therefore they had to go and see their father. That is

:44:55. > :44:59.shocking behaviour from any professional. She makes a powerful

:45:00. > :45:03.point and she is right to pick up on the complexities of coercive

:45:04. > :45:06.control, none of us can underestimate how difficult it will

:45:07. > :45:10.be for professionals to truly understand the complexities of this

:45:11. > :45:14.behaviour. But they must understand it to make sure that the law that is

:45:15. > :45:19.already in place is put into practice. Madam Deputy Speaker, I

:45:20. > :45:26.know the house has also thought very long and hard about other ways the

:45:27. > :45:30.government has shown its commitment to tackling domestic violence.

:45:31. > :45:34.Particular you through the convention that sets out a clear

:45:35. > :45:39.commitment to attacking domestic violence through legislation,

:45:40. > :45:47.training and awareness campaigns. I applaud them for the fact they have

:45:48. > :45:53.signed it, but can the Minister, in his or her, whichever minister is

:45:54. > :45:57.reply, in their response today, clarify when the assembled

:45:58. > :46:02.convention will be ratified? Not only by the UK but other countries

:46:03. > :46:05.like Germany, Norway, Ireland, who are still while signatories, not

:46:06. > :46:11.ratifying that treaty. It is an important statement about the fact

:46:12. > :46:15.that combating violence against women and domestic violence needs to

:46:16. > :46:19.be on all government agendas, we need that ratification as a way of

:46:20. > :46:23.ensuring that message is sent out not just to embers of the Council of

:46:24. > :46:27.Europe but two other nonmembers as well. To tackle domestic abuse we

:46:28. > :46:32.need victims to feel confident in our legal system. That reports that

:46:33. > :46:39.are made will be taken successfully to prosecution. That those who have

:46:40. > :46:43.been abused feel safe in doing that. That is why in my contribution to

:46:44. > :46:51.the debate, I want to make two specific points. First, that the

:46:52. > :46:53.government needs to be clear, or perhaps in the debate today,

:46:54. > :46:57.reiterate its support for the fact that legal aid for victims of

:46:58. > :47:05.domestic abuse, child abuse, is still in place. And that perhaps the

:47:06. > :47:11.Minister can update us on the work they are doing in this area. And

:47:12. > :47:15.particularly around the domestic violence gateway where victims are

:47:16. > :47:20.required to provide objective evidence of abuse to be able to

:47:21. > :47:24.qualify for legal aid. I think Madam Deputy Speaker, the government have

:47:25. > :47:29.made their intention in this area very clear in terms of the support

:47:30. > :47:33.that should be there but in practice, some women have found it

:47:34. > :47:40.difficult to have the prescribed forms of evidence that are required

:47:41. > :47:44.to access the gateway. To have that evidence in place. The Ministry of

:47:45. > :47:47.Justice has a review of the domestic violence gateway under way, perhaps

:47:48. > :47:54.the Minister can say more about where we are with that review.

:47:55. > :47:56.Because it is urgently needed. The all-party parliamentary group on

:47:57. > :48:01.domestic violence, which I am vice-chair and my honourable friend,

:48:02. > :48:07.the member for bone and yard -- Birmingham Yardley is the chair, I

:48:08. > :48:10.would like to draw the house's attention to our recent report

:48:11. > :48:15.following another parliamentary hearings with expert witnesses and

:48:16. > :48:21.individuals with personal experience in the family court system. In the

:48:22. > :48:24.evidence we heard, more victims are now being cross-examined by

:48:25. > :48:28.perpetrators of abuse in family court proceedings. Which can affect

:48:29. > :48:34.not just adults but children as well. Women's aid estimate that one

:48:35. > :48:41.in four women are specifically addressed by their perpetrator. It

:48:42. > :48:45.has to be right that victims should be protected when giving evidence in

:48:46. > :48:49.court. And that there can be few members in this place who are

:48:50. > :48:55.content with seeing alleged abusers cross examine those affected by

:48:56. > :48:59.domestic violence. This has to be examined and re-examined urgently

:49:00. > :49:03.and we need to put an end to survivors of domestic abuse being

:49:04. > :49:08.cross-examined by their alleged abusers in court. The second point I

:49:09. > :49:12.wanted to raise was regarding to special measures. It has already

:49:13. > :49:17.been mentioned in an intervention earlier on. In the all-party

:49:18. > :49:23.parliament regroup hearings we also heard evidence about the traumatic

:49:24. > :49:28.impact of a survivor of domestic abuse coming face to face with their

:49:29. > :49:33.perpetrator in court. Yet, half of all women who experienced domestic

:49:34. > :49:36.violence and the family court system have no specific protection measures

:49:37. > :49:41.available to them when they attend court. More than one in three, were,

:49:42. > :49:45.as a result were verbally or physically abused by their former

:49:46. > :49:50.partners while in court buildings. I find these figures quite shocking

:49:51. > :49:57.given the nature of the crimes we aren't talking about here. I welcome

:49:58. > :50:00.the Lord Chancellor's announcement today about the additional support

:50:01. > :50:05.put in place for vulnerable witnesses. My understanding is that

:50:06. > :50:09.victims of domestic abuse are treated as a vulnerable witnesses. I

:50:10. > :50:12.hope the Minister in his contribution today can confirm that

:50:13. > :50:16.those announcements, which are very welcome, including those who have

:50:17. > :50:21.suffered domestic abuse and violence. Specifically, an increase

:50:22. > :50:28.in the number of locations where victims and witnesses can give

:50:29. > :50:34.evidence remotely. And I think, even more welcome, the prerecording of

:50:35. > :50:39.evidence from 2017. These measures are a real step forward but we need

:50:40. > :50:44.to make sure they are not just available to some victims but to

:50:45. > :50:47.all. I am sure that members of the house will want to have those

:50:48. > :50:51.reassurances today because we need all of the family courts to give

:50:52. > :50:58.witnesses and victims the support they need. The other two areas of

:50:59. > :51:03.special measures in family court that are important are the ability

:51:04. > :51:06.for victims and witnesses to be able to have separate waiting rooms and

:51:07. > :51:18.to leave the court by separate exits, particular vital for those

:51:19. > :51:24.who might be living in refuges. I think the way that government would

:51:25. > :51:29.want to do so as well, we need to see an end to the cross-examination

:51:30. > :51:33.of survivors of domestic violence by the abusers, we need assurances that

:51:34. > :51:38.special measures are routinely available for family court

:51:39. > :51:42.proceedings. I thank her forgiving way, which he not agree with me that

:51:43. > :51:46.what is really required here is some form of witness protection scheme.

:51:47. > :51:53.We had a debate on this many years ago. I understand the point he is

:51:54. > :51:57.making, that might be appropriate in some cases. But many of the people

:51:58. > :52:01.who have spoken to me about this simply want these very basic

:52:02. > :52:04.measures in place. Wings that should be in place already but are not

:52:05. > :52:08.being given the priority they need. I know there is pressure on the

:52:09. > :52:11.court system and on budgets but we have to make sure the courts see

:52:12. > :52:15.this as a priority and at the moment, I think we would be forgiven

:52:16. > :52:19.for thinking that they are not seeing it as a priority. The third

:52:20. > :52:22.element is Robert training for family court staff, particularly on

:52:23. > :52:29.coercive behaviour as set out eloquently by the Honourable member

:52:30. > :52:37.for Bridgend. And finally, but not at all least, we need excellent risk

:52:38. > :52:41.assessment around cases where abuse is involved. We know this is a

:52:42. > :52:47.government that understands the problem, three months ago the police

:52:48. > :52:51.said to the peace commissioners that victims of abuse are still being let

:52:52. > :52:57.down. Improvements like the ones that have been announced today are

:52:58. > :53:00.welcome. The change in culture is still not complete. We need the Lord

:53:01. > :53:04.Chancellor, Minister on the bench today, my right honourable friend

:53:05. > :53:07.the Home Secretary and the Prime Minister to continue to put this

:53:08. > :53:13.issue at the top of the government agenda because we need to tackle

:53:14. > :53:16.domestic abuse and we need to tackle the kind of tragic cases that the

:53:17. > :53:21.Honourable lady started with today and I hope this debate will continue

:53:22. > :53:22.to put that at the top of the government agenda for the rest of

:53:23. > :53:37.this government. I want to thank her for bringing

:53:38. > :53:42.this debate and the campaigning around it because it is so necessary

:53:43. > :53:49.that people in here understand the reality of what is going on.

:53:50. > :53:57.I would like to thank Claire for being here, bravely, for having the

:53:58. > :54:02.courage to put her personal tragedy, which most of us could not endure,

:54:03. > :54:10.forward so that this can never ever happen to anybody else, and we will

:54:11. > :54:14.be letting her down... Surrey, Madam Deputy Speaker, we will be letting

:54:15. > :54:22.your sons down if we don't do that, and we will remember Jack and Paul.

:54:23. > :54:25.It is a simple but awful fact that women bear the brunt of violent

:54:26. > :54:30.crime in England and Wales. Whilst violent crime against men is

:54:31. > :54:36.falling, ONS crime statistics for England and Wales show that between

:54:37. > :54:40.2009 and 2014 violence against women perpetrated by someone they know

:54:41. > :54:45.increased rapidly. Alongside this dramatic rise in violence, services

:54:46. > :54:50.women rely on for escaping violence and abuse are disappearing. Between

:54:51. > :54:51.2010-12 as third of local authority funding for domestic and sexual

:54:52. > :55:11.violence services was cut and a third of referrals to refuges were

:55:12. > :55:13.turned away. It is also true that domestic violence have a higher rate

:55:14. > :55:16.of repeat victimisation than any other crime. On average a woman will

:55:17. > :55:18.endure violence 35 times before making her first quarter the police.

:55:19. > :55:21.Even once they have sought help and the case is going forwards, the

:55:22. > :55:22.women are often re-victimised and re-traumatised by their perpetrators

:55:23. > :55:26.through the prosecution process and in the family courts. One particular

:55:27. > :55:30.focus of this are the fights that ensued between the victim and

:55:31. > :55:34.perpetrator over contact the children and the consequences of the

:55:35. > :55:37.decision made. Sadly this is something that women in my

:55:38. > :55:41.constituency have suffered first-hand and I'm sure I'm not

:55:42. > :55:44.alone in that. Just one example, I could have picked many, constituent

:55:45. > :56:05.came to me with issues regarding custody and

:56:06. > :56:08.contact with her child. The father had been extremely abusive and these

:56:09. > :56:10.behaviours had been perpetuated by the father's parents. Unfortunately

:56:11. > :56:13.other legal issues on the part of the mother led to her losing custody

:56:14. > :56:15.of the child, who was placed in the care of the paternal grandparents.

:56:16. > :56:17.The mother was granted contact but this was at the home of the paternal

:56:18. > :56:19.grandparents, who had both facilitated and taken part in

:56:20. > :56:22.abusive behaviour. The trauma experienced by the mother in order

:56:23. > :56:25.to maintain a relationship with her child, as you can imagine, was

:56:26. > :56:29.extreme. The judge in this case failed to understand or show any

:56:30. > :56:33.appreciation of the dynamics of domestic abuse. This lack of

:56:34. > :56:38.understanding doesn't just re-victimised survivors, it causes

:56:39. > :56:41.direct harm to the children. The NSPCC report 20% of children in the

:56:42. > :56:51.UK have witnessed domestic abuse, and exposure causes anxiety, as well

:56:52. > :56:55.as learning disabilities. In 2015, it was reported that 62% of children

:56:56. > :57:00.in a household where there is domestic violence perpetrated are

:57:01. > :57:04.also directly harmed. How can our Family Courts fail to see the link

:57:05. > :57:07.between coercive, violent and controlling behaviour perpetrated by

:57:08. > :57:12.men towards women and the threat posed to the safety of children and

:57:13. > :57:16.that family? Thank you for giving way. Would she agree with me that

:57:17. > :57:20.there are many cases of domestic violence where the woman, perhaps

:57:21. > :57:26.because she has hopes of the relationship subsisting or maybe

:57:27. > :57:30.intimidation or other factors, doesn't press charges but it is

:57:31. > :57:34.important we still take into account those allegations made when it comes

:57:35. > :57:38.to the Family Courts? It is not just prosecution that should be taken

:57:39. > :57:42.seriously? I absolutely agree and one of the reasons I agree is that

:57:43. > :57:46.we need to be giving some of the responsibility for the way forward

:57:47. > :57:50.to the victims, whereas the court system seems to be taking everything

:57:51. > :57:59.away all the time and using evidence to penalised rather than support

:58:00. > :58:02.them. I say to the Minister, how is it that family courts can knowingly

:58:03. > :58:05.placed children directly in harms way? That is what is happening. The

:58:06. > :58:10.2015 women aid survey of survivors of domestic abuse who had

:58:11. > :58:14.experienced the Family Courts found 76% of respondents found the judge

:58:15. > :58:18.granted child contact with the father when they knew the children

:58:19. > :58:23.had witnessed domestic abuse. Even more terrifying, over 44% of

:58:24. > :58:27.survivors reported the judge granted child contact the father when they

:58:28. > :58:30.knew the children had been directly abused by the father. Will the

:58:31. > :58:34.Minister confirm to the House that there must not be an automatic

:58:35. > :58:39.assumption of shared parenting in child contact cases where domestic

:58:40. > :59:01.abuse is a feature but that child contact

:59:02. > :59:05.should be decided based on the informed judgment of what is in the

:59:06. > :59:07.best interests of that child? Furthermore will the Minister

:59:08. > :59:09.support Womens Aid 's recommendation that judges, staff in the Family

:59:10. > :59:11.Courts and other front line staff received specialist training on the

:59:12. > :59:13.impact of domestic abuse on children? Finally, it is important

:59:14. > :59:16.in this debate, as it is whenever this House debate violence and a

:59:17. > :59:18.survivor is forced to seek safety and face her abuser in court, the

:59:19. > :59:20.damage has already been done. Early intervention that support from the

:59:21. > :59:23.earliest possible age to recognise and develop positive and respectful

:59:24. > :59:25.relationships will prevent children growing up believing abuse and

:59:26. > :59:30.violent relationships are normal. It will teach boys and girls to respect

:59:31. > :59:34.themselves and others, that their body is their own and they must

:59:35. > :59:39.determine their own lives. Does the Minister therefore agreed that

:59:40. > :59:45.mandatory age-appropriate resilience education in schools is necessary to

:59:46. > :59:48.prevent domestic abuse and violence? Fundamentally, we ought to be trying

:59:49. > :59:56.to prevent this horrific crime from ever occurring. I would like to

:59:57. > :00:02.offer my congratulations to the honourable member for securing this

:00:03. > :00:06.debate and for the incredibly powerful, moving speech. It was a

:00:07. > :00:13.fantastic job to put that on record. I would like to congratulate Womens

:00:14. > :00:18.Aid as well for the sub battle-macro a hard-hitting report of 19 child

:00:19. > :00:21.homicides. It is difficult reading, it is always difficult to hear these

:00:22. > :00:28.examples but he had them we must because they show that domestic

:00:29. > :00:32.abuse is not just an issue, 19 real children have had their lives cut

:00:33. > :00:41.short, another two seriously harmed, three mothers killed, seven fathers

:00:42. > :00:44.who committed suicide and four fathers convicted and imprisoned.

:00:45. > :00:49.There are likely to be many more people directly touched by these

:00:50. > :00:52.tragic events, siblings, grandparents, surviving wives,

:00:53. > :00:57.family and friends. All of those men were known to agencies, 11 of the 12

:00:58. > :01:02.were known to the police as well. I have had a number of constituents

:01:03. > :01:06.approached me about their custody cases, with some mothers unhappy,

:01:07. > :01:07.some fathers feeling they have been treated badly and grandparents

:01:08. > :01:22.unable to get a look in. Whatever the rights and wrongs of

:01:23. > :01:25.those individual cases, it is clear the only thing that should be done,

:01:26. > :01:27.the right thing to do, is to put the child first, absolutely at the

:01:28. > :01:29.centre of decision-making. There are many good examples of good practice

:01:30. > :01:32.in Family Courts including my closest court in Croydon but there

:01:33. > :01:36.is much more that can be done and lessons to be learned. In a number

:01:37. > :01:39.of cases, there are protective screens, video links, separate

:01:40. > :01:43.waiting rooms and separate entrances are available where appropriate but,

:01:44. > :01:47.as we have heard, that does not always work. The Womens Aid report

:01:48. > :01:52.goes on to detail a survey that was done of people but have gone through

:01:53. > :01:57.the family court system pointing to areas of real concern, with 55% of

:01:58. > :02:02.women saying they had no access to any protection measures in the

:02:03. > :02:03.court. Extraordinarily, 25% had been cross-examined by their former

:02:04. > :02:23.partner during the court. Can you imagine

:02:24. > :02:25.what that poor lady must have been going through, revisiting all of

:02:26. > :02:29.that again? 39% were verbally or physically abused by their former

:02:30. > :02:34.partner while actually on the Family Court estate. 44% reported that the

:02:35. > :02:39.judge granted child contact with the father when they knew the children

:02:40. > :02:43.had been directly abused by the father, and 76% reported that the

:02:44. > :02:47.judge granted child contact with the father when they knew the children

:02:48. > :02:52.had witnessed domestic abuse. I want to touch on two cases. Firstly I

:02:53. > :02:57.would like to add a 20th child to the list, Ellie Butler, who left her

:02:58. > :03:12.short life in my constituency, Sutton. Her parents met in a club in

:03:13. > :03:15.Sutton in March 2000 and six. Ben Butler had a criminal record

:03:16. > :03:17.including violence, attempted robbery, intimidation of a witness,

:03:18. > :03:19.and a conviction for assaulting his former girlfriend. Within weeks,

:03:20. > :03:22.Jenny Gray was pregnant with Ellie. The first time Butler was left alone

:03:23. > :03:24.with Ellie, who was just six weeks old, she sustained minor burns to

:03:25. > :03:27.her forehead and hand. Shortly afterwards, as this was brushed off

:03:28. > :03:32.as an accident, Butler again looked after Ellie. That evening he took

:03:33. > :03:35.her to our local hospital where she was diagnosed with injuries that

:03:36. > :03:40.suggested she may have been violently shaken. He was arrested on

:03:41. > :03:43.suspicion of GBH and the London Borough of Sutton started

:03:44. > :03:50.proceedings to have her taken into care. In January 2008, a judge found

:03:51. > :03:54.Butler had been responsible for both sets of injuries and ruled out any's

:03:55. > :03:59.mother as a long-term carer. In August that year he awarded

:04:00. > :04:03.temporary custody to Ellie's maternal grandparents. Butler went

:04:04. > :04:07.to prison, during which time Jenny Gray discovered she was pregnant

:04:08. > :04:12.again and hit the birth from local authorities. In October 2009, Butler

:04:13. > :04:16.was released on bail and walk free on appeal after three judges ruled

:04:17. > :04:19.his conviction was unsafe. The quashing of the conviction did not

:04:20. > :04:32.automatically reverse the ruling that the parents

:04:33. > :04:36.were not fit to care for any sub Butler went to war with the

:04:37. > :04:38.authorities and three years later Lady Justice Hallett made a decision

:04:39. > :04:40.that was to prove fatal for any. Not only did she return any to the

:04:41. > :04:42.parents custody, brushing aside convictions, saying the violent

:04:43. > :04:45.behaviour was not directed at children, but went on to write, it

:04:46. > :04:49.is seldom I see a happy ending public law proceedings, it is a joy

:04:50. > :04:52.to oversee the return of a child to her parents. Ellie's grandfather was

:04:53. > :04:58.said to have warned her, you will have blood on your hands, and how

:04:59. > :05:01.prescient he was. In addition to the judgment, Mrs Justice Cox make an

:05:02. > :05:05.order that all files held by the authority should be amended to

:05:06. > :05:10.include reference to the fact that the parents had been exonerated over

:05:11. > :05:17.her injuries and should proactively inform agencies of his innocence.

:05:18. > :05:21.What can the agencies make of that? How can they be denied the ability

:05:22. > :05:26.to review what was happening with a clean sheet restored to these

:05:27. > :05:30.people? It was not long after Ellie went back that she suffered a broken

:05:31. > :05:34.shoulder for which the parents sought no medical help as they

:05:35. > :05:39.sought to hide things from the authorities. In October 2013 Ellie

:05:40. > :05:44.was found dead at the hands of Ben Butler. The parents, opted a plot to

:05:45. > :05:49.club up the real cause of death, even sending Ellie's younger sibling

:05:50. > :05:55.to discover the body as part of the plot. Ellie's grandparents have not

:05:56. > :06:00.given up fighting for her, they have been trying to fight hard for

:06:01. > :06:03.custody of the two children. Unfortunately, Ellie's grandmother

:06:04. > :06:07.died on the day the trial started but her grandfather continues to

:06:08. > :06:12.speak out against the ruling which led to Sutton Council and other

:06:13. > :06:16.agencies are unable to do their job, and they did a good job but with

:06:17. > :06:21.their hands tied. My heart goes out to be and his other grandchild. I

:06:22. > :06:27.was able to catch a moment with the honourable member for Warrington who

:06:28. > :06:30.have had to leave the debate, and we remain, both of us, open for kneel

:06:31. > :06:36.to approach and we would like to support him in any way we can.

:06:37. > :06:41.Another case is far too close to home for me. Someone I know very

:06:42. > :06:46.well and the situation is ongoing so I will not be specific. A few years

:06:47. > :06:50.ago and met someone she later discovered had two children from a

:06:51. > :06:54.previous relationship. The mother and children ended up going to a

:06:55. > :06:58.refuge, changing their name and secretly moving away. Even though

:06:59. > :07:02.social services were involved he managed to track them down through

:07:03. > :07:05.months of trawling electoral rolls. Anna found herself soon in

:07:06. > :07:09.controlling relationship, we have heard about control this afternoon,

:07:10. > :07:14.stripping her away from her family and friends. He used drugs and was

:07:15. > :07:18.violent on occasions. She eventually had a child but the situation

:07:19. > :07:21.continued to deteriorate, affecting the child's stability and

:07:22. > :07:47.upbringing, and was helped by her partner's mother to leave and start

:07:48. > :07:50.again on her own. But it was not the end, Anna found a tracker in her

:07:51. > :07:52.car, she was continually harassed and stored as were family members as

:07:53. > :07:55.well. Agencies were aware, the police were aware, she was in and

:07:56. > :07:57.out of police stations to give statements, he would pound on the

:07:58. > :08:00.door at night, jumping over the fence, smashing the glass to get in

:08:01. > :08:03.the door. She has had to learn so much for herself about the system,

:08:04. > :08:05.her former partner has a good solicitor and knows how to make the

:08:06. > :08:08.best of the system, not for the child but for the solicitor's

:08:09. > :08:10.client. She could not apply for any non-molestation order while he was

:08:11. > :08:13.on bail. Whilst the police were out to arrest him, her family could not

:08:14. > :08:15.find out whether he was detained because of data protection issues.

:08:16. > :08:18.The police have her on an alert list with a promised five minutes

:08:19. > :08:21.response rate but last time it took 25 minutes. We can understand about

:08:22. > :08:25.police pressure but the promise of five minutes and 25 minutes makes

:08:26. > :08:28.all the difference when planning for such an eventuality. If you know it

:08:29. > :08:33.is 25 minutes you can try to deal with that the best you can. Anna has

:08:34. > :08:36.the support of both families, her own and her partner's. Her parents

:08:37. > :08:42.discovered they were grandparents quite a long way after she was

:08:43. > :08:46.stripped from the family, and they now have a wonderful, happy

:08:47. > :08:50.grandchild and Anna has become the most amazing mother in the face of

:08:51. > :08:54.such adversity, her child is thriving. She is lucky. Anna could

:08:55. > :08:59.have found herself on the Womens Aid list. I am delighted that she has

:09:00. > :09:03.not although the matter is nowhere near close, but please let's do more

:09:04. > :09:06.to support the work of the groups associated with Women's Aid, let's

:09:07. > :09:10.do more to improve the response for people like Anna and children like

:09:11. > :09:14.Ellie. We cannot let them down. I know what it is like looking at

:09:15. > :09:20.families and how helpless they feel in these sorts of cases. I cannot

:09:21. > :09:25.even begin to imagine actually being involved at the heart of that abuse,

:09:26. > :09:30.as we have heard about Claire, so it is really important that the police,

:09:31. > :09:35.the agencies, and of course the macro to do everything they can and

:09:36. > :09:36.we work to make those agencies and Family Courts work, that these

:09:37. > :09:49.tragedies cannot happen again. Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I

:09:50. > :09:55.want to start on a positive note in a debate that has so far been

:09:56. > :10:00.incredibly moving, even to those who are the most battle hardened and

:10:01. > :10:03.battle weary as myself. It has been incredibly moving. The positive is

:10:04. > :10:08.that today, this morning, the government released information

:10:09. > :10:15.around the protection of women's refuges. From some of their changes

:10:16. > :10:21.to the housing benefit bill that was going ahead. I want to pay credit to

:10:22. > :10:27.the government for finally listening on the issue. But also to say that

:10:28. > :10:34.in this house, on these matters, we must work together and today, all of

:10:35. > :10:40.us here, the stories we are hearing today, have got to go some way to

:10:41. > :10:46.getting change in this area. This is now our next boat -- next fight and

:10:47. > :10:52.it is a fight that the public are going to get involved with as the

:10:53. > :11:00.archers I believe is about to enter into the family court after the

:11:01. > :11:04.episode on Friday is anything to go by. That has done a huge amount to

:11:05. > :11:11.raise awareness of the issue. The family court is an area that needs

:11:12. > :11:16.some of that. I want to pay huge credit to the member for Burnaston

:11:17. > :11:20.Stockbridge, the member for Hove and the right Honourable member for

:11:21. > :11:27.Basingstoke for securing this debate. The testimony about Claire's

:11:28. > :11:35.story from the member for Penistone and Stockbridge was incredibly

:11:36. > :11:38.moving. We have heard heartfelt heartbreak across the house about

:11:39. > :11:43.the victims of domestic violence in the family courts. Having this

:11:44. > :11:47.debate is important for a number of reasons. The first is to send out a

:11:48. > :11:53.rally cry to all of the victims in this country, and their children,

:11:54. > :12:00.that down here, in this bubble, that we can hear them. The family courts

:12:01. > :12:04.in this country, for those who have never had anything to do with them,

:12:05. > :12:11.and most of the people who have, are incredibly secretive. They wrapped

:12:12. > :12:18.up in confidentiality, where children get called P1, P two, X

:12:19. > :12:24.four. They get no media attention for this reason. It is difficult to

:12:25. > :12:29.report what goes on there. So today, in this place, it is our chance to

:12:30. > :12:32.bring some much-needed lie to that darkness and see what our

:12:33. > :12:38.institutions are really doing for the people of the UK. I thank her

:12:39. > :12:43.for giving way. Does she agree that there is still much work to be done

:12:44. > :12:47.to ensure that the police get the case to court, the case of my

:12:48. > :12:52.constituent, Louise, suffered the most terrible abuse but has never

:12:53. > :12:56.had that day in court, not just a personal tragedy for her but a

:12:57. > :13:03.national scandal for all of us. I agree entirely, in this place, we

:13:04. > :13:07.have some reasons to be proud of efforts that have been made by

:13:08. > :13:11.successive governments, year in and year out. The laws in this country

:13:12. > :13:16.are relatively good when it comes to domestic violence. Where we fail,

:13:17. > :13:23.time and again, is how we implement those laws and you don't need to

:13:24. > :13:27.look much further than many police reports on assessments of how police

:13:28. > :13:32.are handling cases of domestic violence to see that we need to do

:13:33. > :13:36.more. In this place we often make laws and we open a door to an empty

:13:37. > :13:41.room and that is a problem for victims. What I want to say to the

:13:42. > :13:45.victims who may be watching this and a lot have been in touch with me to

:13:46. > :13:51.tell their story and they want their stories heard. What I am sure they

:13:52. > :13:55.and everybody in this place wants to say is that the most important

:13:56. > :14:03.message, that victims of domestic and sexual violence rarely hear, is

:14:04. > :14:07.that we believe you. Those three words, if every single one of us can

:14:08. > :14:13.just tell everybody to stand and say we believe you, we could change

:14:14. > :14:16.things for victims of domestic violence who are frequently

:14:17. > :14:22.disbelieved by every single agency that they are put in front. The

:14:23. > :14:26.second reason that today's bait is important is to educate ourselves as

:14:27. > :14:31.legislators. My honourable and dear friend, the member for Hove, and I,

:14:32. > :14:35.have chatted about this subject many times in the last six months. On

:14:36. > :14:40.many occasions, he has come up to me and been stunned by The KC has. As

:14:41. > :14:48.if this is the worst case in the whole world. -- the case he has. I

:14:49. > :14:52.am sure we give voice to some of those examples today, some shocking

:14:53. > :14:58.stories. He is always so shocked and horrified and angry about every

:14:59. > :15:02.case. For me, the cases have become more expected, why are working with

:15:03. > :15:11.victims of violence have in many ways numbed me but am only human. I

:15:12. > :15:15.thank her for giving way, she talks about working with victims of

:15:16. > :15:21.domestic violence, IT worked in that field and one of the things I found

:15:22. > :15:24.that was frightening was that courts tend to think of domestic violence

:15:25. > :15:31.only in terms of bruises or injuries. And the archers have been

:15:32. > :15:35.brilliant at showing the impact of coercive and abusive behaviour but

:15:36. > :15:41.there is an incredible naivete in believing that coercive and abusive

:15:42. > :15:47.behaviour to mothers will not also happen to children. And if legal aid

:15:48. > :15:51.were available, it would be a huge help to those women to protect

:15:52. > :15:58.themselves. I couldn't agree more and I will come back to the issues

:15:59. > :16:02.of legal aid in a moment. The government opposite have certainly

:16:03. > :16:06.tried with the law to look at coercive control and we are to early

:16:07. > :16:10.down the line in that legislation to seek something that converts, to me

:16:11. > :16:14.it is not that convex, I don't find it too good to understand so I'm not

:16:15. > :16:21.sure why I am constantly cutting people slack, we should understand

:16:22. > :16:25.and I think the archers has definitely done something. And Henry

:16:26. > :16:34.of the archers, the small boy, there is no doubt about it that that child

:16:35. > :16:44.has been coerced, controlled. It is harrowing, I feel chills thinking

:16:45. > :16:49.about it. The member for Hove ran up to me and said he doesn't understand

:16:50. > :16:52.why people are still walking around in the streets, how can they carry

:16:53. > :16:57.on with their lives when this is happening? Why are they not

:16:58. > :17:02.screaming out about the family court system. Today in this place we have

:17:03. > :17:06.a chance to help our colleagues here and most importantly, the members in

:17:07. > :17:11.front of us on the government benches, to see the what we, all of

:17:12. > :17:18.us, as a country, are sanctioning at the moment in our court system. Here

:17:19. > :17:22.in this place, we have the power and the agency to change this. For every

:17:23. > :17:29.victim in the country and for every victim whose children have died. We

:17:30. > :17:34.must use our agency to do what they would do in a heartbeat if they were

:17:35. > :17:41.anywhere near as privileged as every single one of us. And so to our aid

:17:42. > :17:47.agency to changes. I speak of the report, in conjunction with the

:17:48. > :17:51.report today from women's aid and I would ask the minister today to give

:17:52. > :17:57.us some assurances about what we are actually going to do about this. I

:17:58. > :18:04.love warm words, I say them myself. I want hard actions. Myself and the

:18:05. > :18:08.Right Honourable member for Basingstoke had attempted to begin

:18:09. > :18:13.this conversation with the previous Justice Secretary, however, politics

:18:14. > :18:17.is a fickle game. It now falls to the next secretary to make her mark

:18:18. > :18:22.on the job and it is important to state that currently we could be

:18:23. > :18:27.considered to be breaking the law on these issues in the UK. As a member,

:18:28. > :18:30.currently, for now, of the European Union. We sign up to specific

:18:31. > :18:36.directives on protective victims and one directive explicitly states that

:18:37. > :18:41.we will uphold the protection of victims within our court system and

:18:42. > :18:47.contact with offenders must be avoided. And therefore in all new

:18:48. > :18:52.court buildings that are built, chance would be a fine thing at the

:18:53. > :18:58.moment, most have that macro must have separate waiting areas. Every

:18:59. > :19:02.single day, we are breaching that. We will hear about victims who are

:19:03. > :19:07.not just in the same waiting area but are allowed to be

:19:08. > :19:13.cross-examined, even bullied, by the very people who have abused them for

:19:14. > :19:16.years. In the criminal courts, this would be considered a severe breach

:19:17. > :19:22.of human rights. It would also completely fly in the face of the

:19:23. > :19:28.achieving best evidence standards and most likely, the evidence would

:19:29. > :19:33.be thrown out. For years, we all campaign, the ball in this place,

:19:34. > :19:38.campaigned to have children taken into video rooms. We had partitions

:19:39. > :19:42.in separate waiting rooms, those things have all happened. A quarter

:19:43. > :19:47.of the women survey to work found to have been directly cross-examined in

:19:48. > :19:53.the family courts by their abuser. This issue is rising as a direct

:19:54. > :19:58.result of the cessation of legal aid. And the rising number of

:19:59. > :20:02.citizens acting as litigants in person. When I asked the Justice

:20:03. > :20:08.Department another of months ago for the number of litigants in person in

:20:09. > :20:13.the family courts, I was told that they don't monitor that information.

:20:14. > :20:17.Might I gently suggest, because I am in a good mood because they have

:20:18. > :20:24.done something good today, that, to the justice Minister, that that is

:20:25. > :20:27.simply not good enough. We have to look at trends and what is happening

:20:28. > :20:33.in our courts. I also want to make the point that there is a pervasive

:20:34. > :20:37.myth that family courts are unfairly biased towards mothers. I think we

:20:38. > :20:42.will hear today all kinds of examples of why that is not the

:20:43. > :20:47.case. And it doesn't matter how many times you scale of the building

:20:48. > :20:51.dressed as Spiderman, women are still badly treated in our family

:20:52. > :20:55.court system. This is especially pertinent when it comes to those

:20:56. > :20:59.with a history of domestic violence. The enquiry found there is no

:21:00. > :21:05.evidence to suggest that it is the case that women are favoured. On

:21:06. > :21:12.average, only 1% of applicants to family courts in the UK have access

:21:13. > :21:18.refused. Only 1% are told they can no longer see their children. And

:21:19. > :21:28.70% of all cases in front of the family courts are victims of

:21:29. > :21:34.domestic violence. 1% of 70% of all cases are told they cannot see their

:21:35. > :21:38.children. In three quarters of cases where courts have ordered contact

:21:39. > :21:42.with an abusive parent, children suffer further abuse. Some children

:21:43. > :21:46.have even been ordered to have contact with a parent who has

:21:47. > :21:52.committed offences against the children themselves. We have heard,

:21:53. > :21:57.children have even been killed as a result of residency arrangements. I

:21:58. > :22:02.want to stress as well that an abusive partner can force a victim

:22:03. > :22:08.into the family courts or any civil court in the UK as many times as

:22:09. > :22:12.they like. This is not a judgment you get handed down. Your case falls

:22:13. > :22:18.and then you don't get another bite of the cherry. You can go as many

:22:19. > :22:23.times as you like. You can chase a woman around the country, taking the

:22:24. > :22:27.same claim against and there is nothing that will stop that. There

:22:28. > :22:31.is no doubt in many cases that violent perpetrators use the family

:22:32. > :22:36.court system not to get their children but to continue stalking

:22:37. > :22:44.and continue a reign of terror. The domestic violence a BGG that have

:22:45. > :22:56.suggested recommendations are made for Mrs Grisly in line with the

:22:57. > :23:01.report by women's aid. We want to see -- that fell in line with

:23:02. > :23:08.women's aid. Irony hope the ministers here will listen to what

:23:09. > :23:11.they are hearing here today and act as some of their colleagues have

:23:12. > :23:20.today, to do the right thing, thank you very much. I first want to

:23:21. > :23:22.congratulate my Honourable friends for bringing this debate to the

:23:23. > :23:35.house. In particular I would like to pay

:23:36. > :23:39.tribute to Denise and all of her staff at the Grimsby Womens Aid and

:23:40. > :23:44.all of the women that I have met there who are amazing and who,

:23:45. > :23:48.despite some real tragedy and difficulties, continue to face life

:23:49. > :23:55.with bravery and extraordinary good humour. I have had several victims

:23:56. > :23:59.of domestic violence come to me at surgeries in Grimsby looking for

:24:00. > :24:02.help because they feel they have been let down. They feel like the

:24:03. > :24:07.whole system is stacked against them. They are the ones who have had

:24:08. > :24:11.to move out of the area that they live in, they are the ones who have

:24:12. > :24:16.the burden of proof that falls onto them, they are the ones who have

:24:17. > :24:21.their parenting constantly questioned, and it is they who live

:24:22. > :24:26.in fear of abuse and feel that they will lose their children. They are

:24:27. > :24:29.victims but too often feel they are treated with suspicion rather than

:24:30. > :24:33.compassion and made to feel like the guilty party. The way in which the

:24:34. > :24:40.macro to operate revealed a lack of understanding of the situation that

:24:41. > :24:45.domestic abuse victims find themselves in -- the way in which

:24:46. > :24:49.the Family Courts operate. They should not have to share a room with

:24:50. > :24:53.their abuser and should not have to face cross questioning from them

:24:54. > :25:00.either. As the honourable member for Basingstoke mentioned earlier, it is

:25:01. > :25:03.too difficult for individuals in small spaces to be faced with their

:25:04. > :25:09.abuser and I would like to thank Rush L, one of my constituents, for

:25:10. > :25:16.allowing me to use her name, she was insistent that I use her name, in

:25:17. > :25:19.fact, to highlight the very personal and individual difficulties that

:25:20. > :25:23.represents the difficulty for so many women is because Rochelle fled

:25:24. > :25:27.her abusive partner and yet was forced to face him in court several

:25:28. > :25:38.times over the last six years. He is using the court system to gain

:25:39. > :25:42.access to provide security at their meetings, she was made to sit at the

:25:43. > :25:47.same table in a small room as her former partner and he took the

:25:48. > :25:51.opportunity to make horrendous sexually derogatory comments to her.

:25:52. > :25:55.This is a man who twice put her in hospital whilst she was pregnant.

:25:56. > :26:01.She should never have to be in the same room as him again. But she

:26:02. > :26:04.feels that the Family Court forced her back into the perpetrator's

:26:05. > :26:09.presence and control. Additionally she has had no access to social

:26:10. > :26:14.housing because local authority deemed her to have made herself

:26:15. > :26:18.intentionally homeless, having fled her home. It is so incredibly

:26:19. > :26:26.common, she is not alone in that situation. I thank her for the

:26:27. > :26:31.speech she is making. She has highlighted an important issue which

:26:32. > :26:34.from my work has become increasingly apparent, the training given to

:26:35. > :26:40.teams in local authorities who then are dealing sometimes with social

:26:41. > :26:49.services and social housing family issues where there has been domestic

:26:50. > :26:54.abuse. The importance of awareness and training and leadership for

:26:55. > :26:57.local authorities on these issues. I absolutely agree that training plays

:26:58. > :27:02.a big part, I also think a lot more could be done in terms of cross

:27:03. > :27:06.agency working and understanding. I recently visited schools in my

:27:07. > :27:10.constituency and was shocked to hear a support worker who had worked in

:27:11. > :27:15.the school for nearly 30 years, lived in the community in which she

:27:16. > :27:19.worked, and she believed that around one in five of the children at the

:27:20. > :27:26.school were in families with domestic violence. That figure is

:27:27. > :27:30.shocking in itself, but on the positive side she said it was really

:27:31. > :27:34.important in a school environment that children felt like they have a

:27:35. > :27:37.safe space somewhere where they felt there were good relationships and

:27:38. > :27:43.they were able to open up to the staff there. Again, the honourable

:27:44. > :27:48.member's point about training comes in in schools as well and I believe

:27:49. > :27:53.a lot of that is reported violence, so can the Government consider how

:27:54. > :27:57.to get greater confidence in the system for people to even recognised

:27:58. > :28:02.violence in the household as a problem because I think all so some

:28:03. > :28:05.people are accepted as being a volatile relationship and don't even

:28:06. > :28:10.recognise it as domestic violence all the time, perhaps that is ready

:28:11. > :28:14.the coercive element comes in. That makes me believe even more that good

:28:15. > :28:20.relationship education in schools can help children realise that those

:28:21. > :28:25.are not normal relationships and that is not how loved ones behave

:28:26. > :28:28.towards one another. I tabled Parliamentary questions relating to

:28:29. > :28:33.the effect of domestic violence on children who are subject or witness

:28:34. > :28:36.to it, and I am really concerned that the Government does not seem to

:28:37. > :28:41.have been sufficiently interested in that subject. I asked how many

:28:42. > :28:44.children the Government estimated in homes where domestic violence

:28:45. > :28:48.occurred and how they believe the educational attainment of children

:28:49. > :28:51.who experience domestic violence is affected. The answers I received

:28:52. > :28:55.from the Department of Education word that although they count the

:28:56. > :29:00.number of referrals to children social care in which domestic

:29:01. > :29:03.violence is a factor, the figures do not include all children who

:29:04. > :29:06.experience domestic violence and they do not publish attainment data

:29:07. > :29:12.for children who have been referred. Would greater cross departmental

:29:13. > :29:16.work make sure that this is highlighted because I worried these

:29:17. > :29:22.answers show a lack of urgency in tackling the problem. Finally, I

:29:23. > :29:34.would just like to raise an issue that another constituent brought to

:29:35. > :29:38.me within the Concentrix debacle we have had uncovered because a woman

:29:39. > :29:42.with two children had her tax credit money stopped two weeks ago because

:29:43. > :29:46.she was subject to a random check, she was told she was suspected of

:29:47. > :29:49.living with a partner, Concentrix would not disclose the name of the

:29:50. > :29:54.person they suspected to be living with her, they would not make any

:29:55. > :29:59.home visits, she is a single parent, she left evidence of the fact that

:30:00. > :30:03.she is single, she has now been forced to use food banks, meals at

:30:04. > :30:07.her parents' house, and assistance with school uniform costs for her

:30:08. > :30:10.children. This is particularly difficult because that constituent

:30:11. > :30:15.is a bit of domestic violence, she has had to set up her life again

:30:16. > :30:20.from scratch to make sure that she and her children are safe, and feels

:30:21. > :30:24.a like the state and all of the agencies involved are working

:30:25. > :30:39.against her having a fresh start. The

:30:40. > :30:42.lack of sensitivity, awareness and preparedness across state agencies

:30:43. > :30:44.from the welfare system to Family Courts as well as the police and

:30:45. > :30:47.education system lets down children and victims of domestic violence and

:30:48. > :30:49.leaves them feeling that the whole system is working against them. Can

:30:50. > :30:52.I start by joining the chorus of approval and gratitude to the Member

:30:53. > :30:55.for Penistone and stocks bridge for securing this debate and also giving

:30:56. > :31:00.voice to a family that so desperately wanted it, and doing so

:31:01. > :31:04.so effectively, but also setting the tone for this debate, which I think

:31:05. > :31:09.was really well appreciated by all of us who are following her

:31:10. > :31:11.afterwards. I would also like to thank the honourable member for

:31:12. > :31:15.Basingstoke who spoke briefly and joined in on the pitch for this

:31:16. > :31:21.debate, and also to my honourable friend the Member for Birmingham

:31:22. > :31:26.Yardley who was there for the debate but as a member of the committee

:31:27. > :31:28.could not join in, but I could tell from her unrestrained facial

:31:29. > :31:33.expressions was offering support in many other ways during the process.

:31:34. > :31:37.These members and others here today have respectably championed victims

:31:38. > :31:41.of domestic abuse in Parliament, in Government, and on the front line.

:31:42. > :31:45.Together they bring a wealth of advocacy experience to this debate

:31:46. > :31:49.but I must admit that I have some shame that I only came to realise

:31:50. > :32:13.the true brutal horror of domestic violence relatively recently when I

:32:14. > :32:17.became a member for Parliament. Shortly after the election last year

:32:18. > :32:20.I was in my office sifting through the rubble of my campaign when a

:32:21. > :32:23.woman walked in and asked if I was her new MP. When I said yes, she

:32:24. > :32:25.told me she had just fled her partner having suffered the latest

:32:26. > :32:28.in a long series of very brutal attacks. She sat bruised and shaking

:32:29. > :32:31.and said that she was ready to move on but she needed help. She did not

:32:32. > :32:34.trust the police so she turned to me. That was my first experience,

:32:35. > :32:37.somebody turning to me for help as an MP, and the first time I had sat

:32:38. > :32:40.down with a survivor of domestic abuse. Since that time I have got to

:32:41. > :32:42.know many women who have survived violent relationships and have tried

:32:43. > :32:45.to be the best advocate for them. It is through meeting and listening to

:32:46. > :32:47.the Bible is that I came first to understand how our Family Courts are

:32:48. > :32:53.being used to perpetuate abuse against vulnerable women. 18 months

:32:54. > :32:55.ago I did not know that a convicted criminal could represent himself and

:32:56. > :32:58.cross-examine the victims of his crimes over and over and over again

:32:59. > :33:03.by using the Family Courts. How could I get to this age and not know

:33:04. > :33:09.that? And why is it that so few people I talked to have the faintest

:33:10. > :33:12.idea this is going on daily in the British legal system? One

:33:13. > :33:17.constituent I'm in regular contact with and has now been cross-examined

:33:18. > :33:22.by her former partner on three separate occasions. The man who beat

:33:23. > :33:26.her, who broke her bones, battered her unconscious and hospitalised,

:33:27. > :33:29.who was convicted for his crimes, yet still has the right to summon

:33:30. > :33:54.his victim to court on a spurious custody. He will never win the case

:33:55. > :33:56.but that is not the point. He is already victorious the very second

:33:57. > :33:58.he steps into the court room, because in that instantly get

:33:59. > :34:01.exactly what he wants, which is to continue to inflict violence and

:34:02. > :34:03.abuse against a woman who has already suffered more than most of

:34:04. > :34:05.us could ever possibly imagine. Is it not also important that the

:34:06. > :34:08.courts understand how they are being manipulated in this way and that the

:34:09. > :34:10.courts actually ought to be recording how often and abuse that

:34:11. > :34:16.is deliberately using the courts to further abuse? Concentrix should

:34:17. > :34:20.also be aware that where they received reports of an unreported

:34:21. > :34:23.adult being in the home that actually it may well be the abuse

:34:24. > :34:27.that carrying on the abuse by making. Reports and they should take

:34:28. > :34:35.action to investigate that before they cut of the benefits. She makes

:34:36. > :34:39.an incredibly important point. In fact, the very fact that many of the

:34:40. > :34:45.men who are inflicting this violence are extremely manipulative...

:34:46. > :34:49.Absolutely. They are extremely careful in the way they manipulate

:34:50. > :34:52.people and systems means that far more emphasis and effort should go

:34:53. > :34:55.into understanding the people who are victims who can explain the

:34:56. > :35:01.behaviour the courts are dealing with. If we did that I think a lot

:35:02. > :35:04.of heartbreak and also violence would be avoided. Another

:35:05. > :35:09.constituent told me that she was shaking so violently after a Family

:35:10. > :35:12.Court hearing that she had to be assisted to the taxi. Soon after

:35:13. > :35:14.leaving the taxi had to stop to allow her to open the door and

:35:15. > :35:54.vomit. Madam Deputy Speaker, those of us

:35:55. > :35:56.who have not experienced it cannot comprehend the fear that survived

:35:57. > :35:58.the supper. It is all encompassing and ever present. The prospect of

:35:59. > :36:00.seeing the man who reigned such terror causes paralysis. The

:36:01. > :36:02.faintest possibility that the abuser can get access to personal details,

:36:03. > :36:04.addresses, bank account numbers, medical records, is absolutely

:36:05. > :36:07.overwhelming. What is most grotesque is that abusers know this, they know

:36:08. > :36:09.the Family Courts can be used to torment their victims and in some

:36:10. > :36:11.cases they do so with unrelenting brutality. When you listen to

:36:12. > :36:13.survivors describe their experiences of being summoned, of approaching

:36:14. > :36:15.the hearing date, of being cross-examined by their abuser, and

:36:16. > :36:17.then the aftermath, there is one inescapable truth. The language and

:36:18. > :36:19.vocabulary describing the Family Court experience is identical to the

:36:20. > :36:21.way they described the violence they have experienced in the relationship

:36:22. > :36:24.which they bravely escaped. It should shock everyone that Family

:36:25. > :36:28.Courts are being used in a way that inflicts, not ends, violence against

:36:29. > :36:34.women. Worst of all, from the abuser's perspective, it works. One

:36:35. > :36:38.constituent told me last month that she is dropping harassment charges.

:36:39. > :36:50.This is because there is a good chance that her

:36:51. > :36:53.abuser will gain access to her mental help files because he has

:36:54. > :36:56.chosen to represent himself. She simply cannot bear the thought of

:36:57. > :36:58.him reading and then being gratified by such intimate and personal

:36:59. > :37:00.information. Another has told me that she simply cannot face another

:37:01. > :37:05.cross examination by her convicted abuser. She had been medicated in

:37:06. > :37:10.order to endure the last experience and then the recovery from it took

:37:11. > :37:14.weeks. She told me that if he tries again, she will capitulate, she will

:37:15. > :37:19.give him whatever is demanded simply to avoid the experience. She said to

:37:20. > :37:24.me, I simply do not have it in me to survive another cross examination.

:37:25. > :37:31.There is one example that sums up the sheer horror of the abuse. It is

:37:32. > :37:35.continuation in the Family Court, and that is of Jane Clough. Jane

:37:36. > :37:40.Ross in an abusive and violent relationship until she finally took

:37:41. > :37:45.action and went to the police. Her ex-partner, Jonathan Vass, appeared

:37:46. > :37:49.in court charged with nine counts of rape, one sexual assault, and three

:37:50. > :37:54.counts of common assault. Some of this had taken place while Jane was

:37:55. > :38:01.heavily pregnant with his child. Inexplicably, the judge described

:38:02. > :38:05.DECC decided that that was not a threat and freed him on bail. Jane

:38:06. > :38:09.lived in so much fear that she moved in with her parents for comfort and

:38:10. > :38:14.protection but he eventually found out where she was working and in

:38:15. > :38:19.July 2010 he attacked her as she headed home from work. He stabbed

:38:20. > :38:24.her 19 times and then slashed her throat. Wounds from which she died.

:38:25. > :38:29.The next day, he was arrested approaching her parents' home. He

:38:30. > :38:42.was on his way to murder either his baby child, Jane's parents, or both.

:38:43. > :38:45.I have had the honour of talking to Jane's parents and sister. They are

:38:46. > :38:47.a family whose grace and dignity shine above the horror that they

:38:48. > :38:50.have had to endure. But there is more to this terrible episode, and

:38:51. > :38:54.they are desperate for people to hear about it and learn from it.

:38:55. > :39:00.Once in prison, Vass began demanding parental rights over his child. This

:39:01. > :39:07.was a child whose mother he had beaten and murdered. And the child

:39:08. > :39:11.he would have, in all likelihood, murdered himself if he had had the

:39:12. > :39:17.opportunity. None of us can imagine the pain this caused to Jane's

:39:18. > :39:20.family, but it gets worse still. Jane's sister began adoption

:39:21. > :39:25.proceedings to break the link with Vass. From that moment onwards, the

:39:26. > :39:30.family experienced a legal system stacked in his favour rather than

:39:31. > :39:34.the baby that he had tried to kill. Without access to financial support

:39:35. > :39:38.or the delayed, the family had to find separate representation for the

:39:39. > :39:46.baby and the rest of the family. He had a legal firm not donating -- had

:39:47. > :39:48.a legal firm not donated pro bono representation, they would have had

:39:49. > :39:52.to sell their house to cover the costs. A five-day hearing was

:39:53. > :39:56.scheduled in the Family Court and they were informed Vass had

:39:57. > :40:01.exercised his right to self representation. The man who brutally

:40:02. > :40:02.murdered their sister, their daughter, would be cross-examining

:40:03. > :40:13.them. Chamber of sister says she cannot

:40:14. > :40:19.find the words to express the brutalising fact of this. -- Jane's

:40:20. > :40:23.sister. They were stunned to discover that this was because of

:40:24. > :40:29.concerns for his safety and had nothing to do with the well-being of

:40:30. > :40:33.them. As Jane's sister told me, "It was so shocking, it was all about

:40:34. > :40:41.him. What was best him and how best to protect his rights. Nothing had

:40:42. > :40:45.been balanced against our rights." Under representation, the ask

:40:46. > :40:50.personal questions to the family members, referring to the baby, to

:40:51. > :40:55.the husband, he said "What makes you think you can be a dad to my

:40:56. > :41:01.daughter?" The trauma meted out by the family court process is simply

:41:02. > :41:05.inhuman. This family had suffered enough. The family have asked me to

:41:06. > :41:11.pass on their thanks to two advocates who made a difference to

:41:12. > :41:15.them during and since these events. Dame Louise Casey, whose victims

:41:16. > :41:18.Commissioner learned from their experience and took steps for

:41:19. > :41:24.greater recognition for victims in the family courts. The second is my

:41:25. > :41:29.right honourable men -- right honourable friend, the member for

:41:30. > :41:32.Hogan and Saint Pancras. He, as the Republic prosecutions got to know

:41:33. > :41:37.the family very well. They spoke in the highest possible terms of him

:41:38. > :41:41.and his advocacy for them in this episode. Progress has been made

:41:42. > :41:45.deputy speaker but it has been clay seal. We have not seen a

:41:46. > :41:52.transformation that is desperately needed. The abuse and brutalisation

:41:53. > :41:57.of women and families is being perpetuated with our legal system.

:41:58. > :42:03.To the abuses, the family courts is another tool they can extend their

:42:04. > :42:08.hate, violence and their control of extremely vulnerable women. These

:42:09. > :42:12.are exactly the kind of people the state exists to protect. And that is

:42:13. > :42:16.why every day these practices are are allowed to continue, shame is

:42:17. > :42:20.heaped on our justice system, on this house and on our government. We

:42:21. > :42:30.have the power to stop this happening and yet it continues. Can

:42:31. > :42:33.I also start by thanking the honourable member for Penistone and

:42:34. > :42:39.Stockbridge for securing today's important debate and for her very

:42:40. > :42:44.moving speech. And also the other members who have contributed very

:42:45. > :42:53.moving stories from the own constituents's experiences. I would

:42:54. > :42:57.like to commend women's aid and the group report, we must not stay

:42:58. > :43:01.silent on the issue it raises. We must speak up for the children whose

:43:02. > :43:05.safety and well-being is being put at risk, and their lives, due to

:43:06. > :43:09.poorly risk assessed contact with parents who are known perpetrators

:43:10. > :43:14.of domestic abuse. The fact that in England and Wales in the last ten

:43:15. > :43:16.years, 19 children have been murdered, two mothers, two further

:43:17. > :43:20.children have faced attempts on their lives and seven fathers have

:43:21. > :43:23.killed themselves after killing their children indicates to me that

:43:24. > :43:27.there are indeed systemic shortcomings in the approach to

:43:28. > :43:30.family contact that need to be addressed. I wish I could stand here

:43:31. > :43:32.and say it is all rosy in Scotland but in the other two we face similar

:43:33. > :43:47.challenges. In some respects, we have a fairly

:43:48. > :43:51.robust legislative framework but sometimes the application falls

:43:52. > :43:56.short and we know there is more to do. I am glad that Nicola Sturgeon

:43:57. > :44:00.announced last week that a new domestic abuse bill will be part of

:44:01. > :44:04.the new programme for government. Recognition that psychological abuse

:44:05. > :44:09.and coercive and controlling behaviour can be difficult to

:44:10. > :44:13.address under existing laws and proposed legislation to put that

:44:14. > :44:25.right. Understanding of coercive control has grown.

:44:26. > :44:30.Abusers can use coercive behaviour to continue their abuse through the

:44:31. > :44:34.court system. The underlying issues are similar both sides of the

:44:35. > :44:40.border. I want to highlight the shortcoming our legislation and

:44:41. > :44:46.those areas where it new legislation regulatory guidance could strengthen

:44:47. > :44:47.the well-being of and limit the opportunities for abusers to

:44:48. > :45:02.perpetrate further harm. In rightly, child welfare and

:45:03. > :45:07.children's interests are put first, the law states that when a court is

:45:08. > :45:09.considering the case of a child in relation to parental rights and

:45:10. > :45:13.responsibilities, they must take into account the need to protect the

:45:14. > :45:17.child from abuse or risk of abuse that might affect the child. The law

:45:18. > :45:23.also states that courts must take into effect -- account, the fact

:45:24. > :45:34.that the risk of abuse that the person carrying out the abuse and

:45:35. > :45:39.when a parent raises an action about the residents of a child, the court

:45:40. > :45:43.is under a statutory duty to give the child the opportunity to express

:45:44. > :45:48.his or her views giving account of the child's age and maturity. The

:45:49. > :45:53.court has to have regard as to the views they may express having them

:45:54. > :45:58.due weight relative against the child's age and majority. This

:45:59. > :46:03.ensures the legislation complies with the UN Convention, so far, so

:46:04. > :46:09.good. Unfortunately that is not how it always works in practice. I fear

:46:10. > :46:22.the law is not being consistently applied and can take scant account

:46:23. > :46:25.of the parent with care. Edinburgh University hosted a conference this

:46:26. > :46:29.week that looked at these issues around child contact. I was not able

:46:30. > :46:34.to attend but a keynote presentation was made by the Reverend Tracey

:46:35. > :46:37.Hart, who in October last year was sentenced to 12 months in jail for

:46:38. > :46:41.contempt of court having been accused of attempting to keep her

:46:42. > :46:46.children away from their father. Whom press reports suggest he was a

:46:47. > :46:50.convicted murderer with a history of violence. She spent eight days in

:46:51. > :46:53.jail before being released on appeal. The appeal judges said the

:46:54. > :46:59.sentence was incompetent and she should not have been convicted in

:47:00. > :47:03.the first place but what disturbs me most was that two sheriffs were

:47:04. > :47:09.involved in these outrageous proceedings. That shows we are still

:47:10. > :47:12.tackling the vestiges of an attitudinal culture where the

:47:13. > :47:17.dynamics of coercive control are poorly understood but the impact of

:47:18. > :47:20.domestic abuse is underestimated and the voices of children are

:47:21. > :47:28.diminished. The experience of Tracey Hart and her children suggest that

:47:29. > :47:32.in some part of the judiciary, children's own rights to have their

:47:33. > :47:35.voices heard and respected are not taken seriously enough. Mothers who

:47:36. > :47:39.seek to protect themselves and their children from abusive and dangerous

:47:40. > :47:46.former partners are still seen in some quarters as bitter and

:47:47. > :47:50.vindictive troublemakers. We still have some way to go to ensure that

:47:51. > :47:54.all sheriffs are properly equipped to preside over such cases. I think

:47:55. > :48:01.Tracey Hart has been incredibly brave in speaking out but the other

:48:02. > :48:06.troubling thing that comes out of the court processes that she went

:48:07. > :48:12.through, it is that it can be used for partners to perpetrate further

:48:13. > :48:16.abuse. My comments on this echo previous speakers, we need to ask

:48:17. > :48:20.whether contact arrangements are robust enough to protect families

:48:21. > :48:24.from further abuse and find ways to prevent contact becoming a vehicle

:48:25. > :48:28.through which an abusive ex can continue to abuse their former

:48:29. > :48:32.partner. We need to look at how contact is risk assessed and the

:48:33. > :48:35.staff in courts and contact centres are trained to spot signs of

:48:36. > :48:39.controlling and manipulative behaviour. And with a new regulatory

:48:40. > :48:47.violence that macro regulatory -- at the moment, there is a

:48:48. > :48:52.presumption that contact with parents is a good thing but when

:48:53. > :48:55.France has a history of violence and abuse, is that really the case? I do

:48:56. > :49:00.think we have got the balance right. Tracey Hart said her children were

:49:01. > :49:04.reluctant is bent on with their father. A psychiatric assessment

:49:05. > :49:08.suggested that contact was damaging to their mental health and described

:49:09. > :49:11.her elder son even vomiting before a contact session. These children were

:49:12. > :49:16.still compelled to attend sessions and could -- cajoled by staff to

:49:17. > :49:20.spend time with their father even though they did not want to. Frankly

:49:21. > :49:25.it is not good enough and we need to ensure that all parts of these

:49:26. > :49:28.islands become a safer place for those who have endured domestic

:49:29. > :49:31.abuse. It is incumbent on every single one of us to name these

:49:32. > :49:37.abuses of power for what they are and speak out on behalf of those

:49:38. > :49:40.whose lives are damaged and endangered under present approaches.

:49:41. > :49:49.We can do much better and we must do much better and I hope ministers are

:49:50. > :49:53.listening today and I hope we will. Before I begin my speech, I would

:49:54. > :49:57.pay to get to the backbench committee for bringing this debate

:49:58. > :50:02.forward. I want to pay to view to the moving testimony we have heard

:50:03. > :50:07.today and the contributions from the member of Penistone and Stockbridge

:50:08. > :50:12.and the member for Sutton and Cheam, who told us quite harrowing tales of

:50:13. > :50:17.their experience with constituents. This debate follows in the wake of

:50:18. > :50:22.the publication of women's aid's 19 child homicide report. It is an

:50:23. > :50:28.important debate and there is no doubt there is much more reflection

:50:29. > :50:31.and circumspection required in the treatment of those who have been

:50:32. > :50:40.victims of domestic abuse in family courts. The report tells a tragic

:50:41. > :50:44.and appalling story of 19 children all intentionally killed by a parent

:50:45. > :50:48.who was also a known perpetrator of domestic abuse over a 10-year

:50:49. > :50:55.period. These killings were made possible by an safe formal and

:50:56. > :51:00.informal child contact arrangements. Shockingly, they report uncovers a

:51:01. > :51:04.range of concerns regarding child contact including routine failings

:51:05. > :51:07.to follow legal protocols and a lack of professional understanding about

:51:08. > :51:13.the power and control dynamics of abuse. One of the issues that I

:51:14. > :51:20.think is worthy of consideration is that domestic abuse itself has not

:51:21. > :51:23.been a criminal offence so single incidence are prosecuted under a

:51:24. > :51:30.range of offences come such as common assault or rape. There has a

:51:31. > :51:35.new -- there is now a new offence of coercive control. Because it may

:51:36. > :51:41.prove difficult to prosecute this kind of case, Scotland has announced

:51:42. > :51:44.a new domestic abuse bill as part of Scotland's programme, putting

:51:45. > :51:49.Scotland at the forefront of Nations in attacking the true nature of

:51:50. > :51:55.domestic abuse. This would include criminalisation of psychological

:51:56. > :51:58.abuse and a range of associated measures to modernise the justice

:51:59. > :52:02.system and how it responds to domestic abuse. This is being

:52:03. > :52:06.debated in the Scottish Parliament on this very day. It is clear that

:52:07. > :52:09.domestic abuse is underreported but there is a growing understanding of

:52:10. > :52:14.the damaging impact which known physical forms of abuse can have on

:52:15. > :52:19.those who are subject to it. Methods of control and even threatening to

:52:20. > :52:30.harm others, including children. And in Scotland, the creation of a new

:52:31. > :52:36.offence, of domestic abuse is progress. It will have a significant

:52:37. > :52:41.impact on how society views domestic abuse by ensuring that there is

:52:42. > :52:45.clarity about what is unacceptable under the law. This will make

:52:46. > :52:50.efforts from the police services and the prosecution services more

:52:51. > :52:53.effective in dealing with domestic abusers. Importantly, it will bring

:52:54. > :52:58.clarity for those subjected to domestic abuse at the justice system

:52:59. > :53:02.is focusing on their needs and the needs of their children. Protecting

:53:03. > :53:06.people in abusive relationships and their children, as we have heard so

:53:07. > :53:13.much about today, must be the overriding objective. We spend a lot

:53:14. > :53:16.of time in this chamber talking about children's literacy and

:53:17. > :53:21.education, even their obesity levels. But before we can tackle any

:53:22. > :53:25.of those issues, we must ensure that sufficient measures are in place to

:53:26. > :53:32.keep them safe from harm. Even when necessary from the domestic abuse

:53:33. > :53:37.parent. Family court must be mindful of this. It has to be presumed that

:53:38. > :53:43.contact with the abusive parent is not in the best interest of the

:53:44. > :53:48.child or the known abusive parent who could be required to leave them

:53:49. > :53:55.in considerable danger. It is important the family courts consider

:53:56. > :54:03.parenting capacity, and the chance of future abuse on the ability to

:54:04. > :54:07.parent safely the child and that of the abusive parent. It is vital that

:54:08. > :54:11.family courts prevent further child death by or with putting children

:54:12. > :54:15.first in family courts. This requires something of a cultural

:54:16. > :54:19.change within the family court system to ensure the safety and

:54:20. > :54:20.well-being of children and non-abusive parents is understood

:54:21. > :54:32.and consistently prioritised. When a partner is in an abusive

:54:33. > :54:37.relationship, children in that household are not safe either. And

:54:38. > :54:42.that is an obvious reality towards which all the evidence points. I

:54:43. > :54:45.would urge the Minister to look carefully at the measures put

:54:46. > :54:50.forward in Scotland by the first Minister. It doesn't matter where

:54:51. > :54:53.governments learn from all which examples they follow, the only thing

:54:54. > :54:58.that matters is that lives are improved or, as we have heard today,

:54:59. > :55:02.tragically, that lives are saved, more specifically the lives of

:55:03. > :55:07.children. The 19 child homicides report should give us all pause for

:55:08. > :55:12.thought. One child killed by a parent or carer is one child to

:55:13. > :55:23.many, and these children have no voice. We must be their voice, we

:55:24. > :55:26.must ensure that our justice systems in all corners of Scotland, in all

:55:27. > :55:29.corners of the United Kingdom, serve their children well and keep them

:55:30. > :55:37.safe. Let me begin by congratulating my honourable friend for securing

:55:38. > :55:42.this important debate, and by paying tribute to her constituent, Claire.

:55:43. > :55:46.As a Sheffield resident I can well remember hearing the shocking news

:55:47. > :55:51.of the murder of her two sons, Jack and Paul, and being horrified to

:55:52. > :55:55.find that this came at the hands of their own father. And man who was

:55:56. > :56:00.known to the authorities for his history of domestic violence. I'm

:56:01. > :56:04.inspired by the bravery Claire has shown in such tragedy. Working with

:56:05. > :56:09.women's aid to raise awareness and push for change in the way family

:56:10. > :56:15.courts operate, and I'm pleased to see so many members of this debate

:56:16. > :56:22.joining in her struggle. Sadly, what happened to Claire's sons was not an

:56:23. > :56:28.isolated event. As we have heard, between 2005 and 2015, 19 children

:56:29. > :56:33.in 12 families were killed by perpetrators of domestic abuse. All

:56:34. > :56:39.of the perpetrators were fathers to the children that they killed, all

:56:40. > :56:43.of them had access to their children through formal or informal child

:56:44. > :56:48.contact arrangements. As the Womens Aid report makes clear, the blame

:56:49. > :56:51.for these deaths lies solely with the abusive fathers who killed their

:56:52. > :56:56.children. The failures of the family court system does not in any way

:56:57. > :57:01.detract from that. Nevertheless, we must acknowledge that when it comes

:57:02. > :57:04.to cases involving domestic abuse, the family courts too often fail to

:57:05. > :57:10.put the safety of children and abuse part first. Potentially exposing

:57:11. > :57:17.them to further risk -- abused partners. The Ministry of Justice

:57:18. > :57:21.child arrangements and contact order domestic violence and harm but a

:57:22. > :57:25.clear onus on the family courts to put the safety and best interests of

:57:26. > :57:31.the child first when considering child arrangement orders in cases

:57:32. > :57:38.where domestic violence or abuse has occurred. This guidance is, you

:57:39. > :57:44.would think, simple common sense. Unfortunately, it is not always

:57:45. > :57:47.properly implemented. Family courts understandably take the view that a

:57:48. > :57:52.child should have sustained contact with both parents. Clearly in the

:57:53. > :57:55.majority of cases this could be the desired outcome. The problem arises

:57:56. > :58:02.in many cases where domestic violence is a factor. Where contact

:58:03. > :58:08.with an abusive parent is likely to lead to further harm to that child,

:58:09. > :58:11.but where this is outweighed by the perceived importance of maintaining

:58:12. > :58:16.contact with both mother and father. In other words, the belief that a

:58:17. > :58:21.child's best interests are for them to have safe contact with both of

:58:22. > :58:24.their parents. Although usually the case, it has become an article of

:58:25. > :58:31.faith from which family courts find it difficult to deviate, even for

:58:32. > :58:34.the child's own safety. What's more, this is skewing of priorities

:58:35. > :58:41.encouraged in part by legislation, the children and families Act 2014

:58:42. > :58:45.and in law the principle of contact with both parents as best for

:58:46. > :58:49.children. While this is certainly the case for the majority, it does

:58:50. > :58:53.not recognise that in circumstances where a parent has a history of

:58:54. > :58:59.domestic violence such contact can put a child in harms way. Whenever

:59:00. > :59:02.there are allegations of domestic abuse, there must be a serious

:59:03. > :59:09.assessment authorised by the courts and carried out by experts of the

:59:10. > :59:13.implications that this has by the -- for the child and the safety of the

:59:14. > :59:17.non-abusive parent. For too long the safety of the partner and the

:59:18. > :59:21.children have been viewed as two separate matters by the court. We

:59:22. > :59:26.must encourage a courtroom culture which use them as part of the same

:59:27. > :59:32.issue. Womens Aid are calling for national oversight of the

:59:33. > :59:36.implementation of practice direction 12J and I urge the Minister to look

:59:37. > :59:40.carefully at how we can bring about a shift in the thinking of family

:59:41. > :59:44.court so child safety is put back at its heart. It is not just the

:59:45. > :59:48.decisions of the family courts that are in need of scrutiny but also

:59:49. > :59:51.their working practices. Whilst victims of domestic abuse can be

:59:52. > :59:55.provided with a number of protections when in criminal courts,

:59:56. > :00:00.such as giving evidence from behind a screen or through videolink, these

:00:01. > :00:27.are not available in family courts. On top of this, thanks to the

:00:28. > :00:31.Government's cuts to legal aid, more and more people going to family

:00:32. > :00:33.courts are forced through lack of funds to represent themselves rather

:00:34. > :00:36.than take on a solicitor. The National Audit Office estimates that

:00:37. > :00:38.there has been an 80% increase in the number of cases taken to the

:00:39. > :00:41.family courts where one of the parties is not represented by legal

:00:42. > :00:43.professional, and a 30% increase in cases where neither party has such

:00:44. > :00:45.representation. The upshot of all this is that it is increasingly

:00:46. > :00:48.common for victims of domestic abuse not only to have to face their

:00:49. > :00:50.abusers in court but be directly questioned by them as well.

:00:51. > :00:52.Thankfully there is a greater understanding now than there was in

:00:53. > :00:54.the past that abuse within relationships does not only take the

:00:55. > :00:57.form of physical violence. We know that intimidation, and coercion, are

:00:58. > :01:01.just as much a feature. It takes a great deal of courage for those

:01:02. > :01:05.suffering from domestic abuse to break free from these relationships,

:01:06. > :01:09.and we must ensure that they are offered all the support and

:01:10. > :01:14.encouragement that they need. What they should not have to put up with

:01:15. > :01:18.is basing their abuse's questioning directly in court and being placed

:01:19. > :01:22.in a position where the intimidation they have escaped from is inflicted

:01:23. > :01:25.on them once again. The protection that applies to criminal Court

:01:26. > :01:30.should likewise apply to family court and I trust the Minister will

:01:31. > :01:33.take some time to reflect on the ordeal that appearing in these

:01:34. > :01:39.courts so often is for the victims of abuse. But, above all, I urge the

:01:40. > :01:43.Minister to instigate a full review as other honourable members have

:01:44. > :01:49.called for based on the report submitted by Womens Aid and the APPG

:01:50. > :01:52.on domestic violence, because we must ensure that Jack and Paul and

:01:53. > :02:01.all of the victims are never forgotten. Thank you.

:02:02. > :02:05.I would first like to pay a huge debt to the speakers who have

:02:06. > :02:08.preceded me in this debate, particularly the Member for

:02:09. > :02:11.Penistone who spoke about the heartbreaking case of the

:02:12. > :02:15.constituent Claire Throssell, I am in awe of her strengths in the face

:02:16. > :02:19.of unimaginable trauma and I am glad we can be part of putting Jack and

:02:20. > :02:23.Paul's names on the record here today. I would also like to pay

:02:24. > :02:28.tribute to the amazing Womens Aid organisations across the violence,

:02:29. > :02:32.particularly in Scotland to assisted me in preparing for this debate and

:02:33. > :02:35.work to support women through the ordeal of domestic abuse. They have

:02:36. > :02:41.told me child contact issues are still a huge issue for them. I also

:02:42. > :02:43.pay credit to Glasgow Womens Aid and Rape Crisis centreboard work they do

:02:44. > :02:48.to support women which includes going through the court process. I

:02:49. > :02:52.long for the day, as I'm sure we all do, where women and children can

:02:53. > :02:56.live without fear but until then I'm so glad these organisations and

:02:57. > :02:59.committed staff and volunteers carry out their vital, life-saving work.

:03:00. > :03:03.The Scottish Government is responsible for child protection in

:03:04. > :03:08.Scotland and members may be aware there is a debate going on in the

:03:09. > :03:09.Scottish Parliament today also on new proposed domestic abuse

:03:10. > :03:18.legislation which will build on the excellent work. There is ongoing

:03:19. > :03:26.work on gender based violence and I can recommend all of those involved.

:03:27. > :03:30.The proposed bill in Scotland will create a new offence of domestic

:03:31. > :03:33.abuse which include psychological abuse such as coercive and

:03:34. > :03:36.controlling behaviour which can be difficult to deal with under the

:03:37. > :03:43.existing laws that we have. It will also ensure appropriate penalties

:03:44. > :03:47.are available and find a range of measures to modify the justice

:03:48. > :03:52.system to respond to domestic abuse. We already have in Scotland the

:03:53. > :03:55.victims and witnesses Act which allows special measures in court

:03:56. > :04:00.automatically in criminal cases and the application in some cases can be

:04:01. > :04:03.really important, I have spoken to a number of organisations involved in

:04:04. > :04:08.this and it helps to have these measures in place. The basis for the

:04:09. > :04:12.system is good but sadly Scotland is not immune from the difficulties

:04:13. > :04:16.described so far in this debate. Court processes are not yet perfect

:04:17. > :04:20.and this is reflected in the experiences of women and children

:04:21. > :04:23.going through the system. Scottish Womens Aid tell me there remain

:04:24. > :04:28.concerned by the situation in court where women are not believed, where

:04:29. > :04:32.their experience of domestic abuse is downplayed. The significance of

:04:33. > :04:35.being able to tell your story and be believed is huge. Women are

:04:36. > :04:39.consistently undermined by the abuse they have suffered, their confidence

:04:40. > :04:44.is shattered, getting as far as going to court is a massive ordeal.

:04:45. > :04:50.The legal process then removing any last part of dignity a woman has is

:04:51. > :04:53.unforgivable. There also exists this artificial separation as the Member

:04:54. > :04:56.for Penistone and others have mentioned between an abuser's

:04:57. > :05:01.actions and ability to carry out their role as a parent. It is seen

:05:02. > :05:07.as entirely logical to most people that someone of a mind to abuse,

:05:08. > :05:09.threaten, undermined, rape and control their partner, their ability

:05:10. > :05:14.to care appropriately for their children would come into question.

:05:15. > :05:17.That is not always the case and the notion that a court would decree

:05:18. > :05:22.that contact with the parent who demonstrated capacity for violence

:05:23. > :05:29.is more important than the safety of the child absolutely terrifies me. I

:05:30. > :05:32.have had testimony sent to me by Women Against Rape which I will, in

:05:33. > :05:37.the interest of time, addressed later on, but the prospect of having

:05:38. > :05:41.to deal regularly with an abusive partner is incredibly daunting.

:05:42. > :05:44.Scottish Womens Aid have said the court process denies women and

:05:45. > :05:48.children their right to be protected and recover from abuse. The

:05:49. > :05:53.processes and decisions in our courts are guilty of

:05:54. > :05:56.re-victimisation and this issue of re-victimisation is a very important

:05:57. > :06:01.one and one that we need to look at a cross Government, across the

:06:02. > :06:04.practices that we have. Concentrix was mentioned earlier and the fact

:06:05. > :06:09.that they put people in a position where they are being re-victimised,

:06:10. > :06:13.benefits tribunal scampered people in a situation where their

:06:14. > :06:18.experiences are called into account. The DWP are in that position as well

:06:19. > :06:23.and I mentioned here as I have mentioned before the issue around

:06:24. > :06:27.universal credit and household payments, I mentioned the two child

:06:28. > :06:31.policy and the rate clause and a Government Minister can tell me in a

:06:32. > :06:36.meeting that he bored women suffering domestic abuse should just

:06:37. > :06:39.flee is deeply, deeply worrying and the Government needs to reflect

:06:40. > :06:43.about how we value women and children and how we make sure that

:06:44. > :06:48.they are protected at every aspect of their lives. The abuse of

:06:49. > :06:51.children of course must also be taken into account because they

:06:52. > :06:55.experience that trauma of domestic abuse and can carry that through

:06:56. > :07:00.their whole lives. Their voices are not always heard as they should be.

:07:01. > :07:04.There is a new project called Power up, power-down, under way with the

:07:05. > :07:07.Scottish Young people and Childrens' Commissioner in partnership with

:07:08. > :07:10.Womens Aid and this has the potential to change the way court

:07:11. > :07:14.processes are carried out to allow young people's voices to be heard

:07:15. > :07:18.and allowed their chance to determine what would make them feel

:07:19. > :07:22.safest and what their needs and desires are. They don't want to be

:07:23. > :07:26.put in a position where they are in fear of their lives, where they were

:07:27. > :07:29.really about the impact of them visiting an abusive parent on their

:07:30. > :07:35.mother as well. Finally I would like to read a card from the Recounting

:07:36. > :07:40.Women project which agencies in Scotland have carried out. It is a

:07:41. > :07:43.participate we photo voice product allowing women to share their

:07:44. > :07:48.personal experiences of domestic abuse and it is online as well. I

:07:49. > :07:53.quote, this is the Sheriff Court where I experienced so much

:07:54. > :07:59.injustice. From unsupervised visits, how much abuse can a father do to

:08:00. > :08:04.his child, that puts his child in the streets, changes the locks, put

:08:05. > :08:07.their clothes outside in bin bags? They force the children to see their

:08:08. > :08:12.dad while I am trying to help them forget the trauma. I asked ministers

:08:13. > :08:18.to reflect on this and for us all to reflect a cross Government how we

:08:19. > :08:22.can help these children to be safe. Keir Starmer. Can I congratulate

:08:23. > :08:28.those who secured this debate and everybody that has spent so long

:08:29. > :08:31.working on this issue in particular the APPG on domestic violence and

:08:32. > :08:37.Womens Aid for raising this issue of how domestic violence victims are

:08:38. > :08:40.dealt with in the family Court. The statistics and examples of domestic

:08:41. > :08:44.abuse, some of which have been given this afternoon, are so continually

:08:45. > :08:48.shocking that we have got a duty to come back to the debate over and

:08:49. > :08:53.over again. I don't intend to repeat anything that anybody has already

:08:54. > :08:58.said, I wanted to address two issues, the first is what has been

:08:59. > :09:02.happening in the criminal courts to make the position better, and to

:09:03. > :09:07.raise the question of why it has not been done in the family courts.

:09:08. > :09:11.Secondly, to go to the question of abuse of process where individuals

:09:12. > :09:13.are clearly using the civil courts for a purpose they were not intended

:09:14. > :09:24.for. There are still problems with

:09:25. > :09:28.criminal courts in dealing with domestic abuse but anybody who has

:09:29. > :09:32.worked on this and across the house, people have worked on this. Will

:09:33. > :09:35.recognise that in the last ten to 15 years, real strides have been made

:09:36. > :09:39.in real difference has taken place in relation to the criminal

:09:40. > :09:45.approach. I want to outline why I think that has happened. This is a

:09:46. > :09:50.time to reflect on the criticism of family courts and to see if it can't

:09:51. > :09:55.be replicated. The first thing is we began to count the cases. Back in

:09:56. > :10:01.2002-3, nobody knew how domestic abuse cases were going into criminal

:10:02. > :10:06.Court. So you couldn't begin to have a policy or strategy. We started

:10:07. > :10:10.counting the cases. If the number of cases where litigants in person are

:10:11. > :10:13.not being counted now in front of family courts, it needs to start.

:10:14. > :10:19.Within that, we need to understand having them may be victims of

:10:20. > :10:23.domestic abuse. Counting them is the starting point. You then need a

:10:24. > :10:27.policy so that everyone who plays a part in the process has a policy

:10:28. > :10:30.that helps them make the right decisions in the area they are

:10:31. > :10:36.responsible for. That happened in the criminal process that ten or 12

:10:37. > :10:41.years ago. Those processes began to be rolled out and they have improved

:10:42. > :10:45.over the years. You need a strategy. The strategy that makes it clear

:10:46. > :10:50.what you are trying to achieve, and that it is proactive and forces

:10:51. > :10:55.things to change. You need leadership. People prepared to go

:10:56. > :11:00.out and change what is going to happen. All of that has helped in

:11:01. > :11:04.the criminal sphere. A lot of people leaning in different ways and when

:11:05. > :11:09.you look at the position and how it has changed. To a position where it

:11:10. > :11:15.is now not recognisable. Independent domestic violence advisers,

:11:16. > :11:19.independent sexual violence advisers are there and are extreme the good

:11:20. > :11:24.and relied on by victims to help them through that part of the

:11:25. > :11:26.process. Specialist courts for domestic violence made a real

:11:27. > :11:30.difference where everybody in the court room was trained and

:11:31. > :11:36.understood the issues. There were separate courts and lists and it was

:11:37. > :11:41.an environment that made it easier to deal with domestic violence

:11:42. > :11:44.cases. Better coordination of support, with groups like women's

:11:45. > :11:50.aid and many others, out there to provide support for victims for the

:11:51. > :11:58.journey they would go through in the courts. And practical measures, that

:11:59. > :12:02.took the strain off the victim. The most important, absolutely making

:12:03. > :12:08.sure that a nine 990 is always secured. The tape of the person who

:12:09. > :12:15.phoned the police to report what has happened. And then, a police officer

:12:16. > :12:19.arriving at the scene with a body camel. Those two elements will

:12:20. > :12:24.secure a conviction in almost every case of domestic abuse. It is

:12:25. > :12:30.amazing that it is not the norm, even in the criminal sphere. If you

:12:31. > :12:33.have that, you would almost certainly be able to prove domestic

:12:34. > :12:37.abuse without strain on the victim, who is the person who has to make

:12:38. > :12:44.the case in court. You can prove it with those bits of evidence. I

:12:45. > :12:48.talked to the APG G, and heard some of the evidence that family courts,

:12:49. > :12:51.I was struck by the fact that it simply would not be tolerated in the

:12:52. > :12:55.criminal courts any more. The special measures are a norm in the

:12:56. > :13:00.criminal courts and it would be thought to be the duty of the

:13:01. > :13:04.prosecutor, defence and the court to make sure those provisions are in

:13:05. > :13:07.place. Those are some of the changes that have taken place that have

:13:08. > :13:12.undoubtedly improve the situation in the criminal courts. I am not saying

:13:13. > :13:17.it is perfect and suggesting that more can't be done but it came about

:13:18. > :13:24.because a number of individuals decided to listen. To what people

:13:25. > :13:28.were saying to them. The honourable member for Hove has mentioned the

:13:29. > :13:34.case of Jane Clough, the terrible case, Penny and John, her parents,

:13:35. > :13:39.came to see me and I sat down and let them tell me what had happened

:13:40. > :13:43.to them in their journey through our courts. It reflected on the

:13:44. > :13:47.organisation I was running and reflected on the criminal justice

:13:48. > :13:52.system for which I am very proud but I listened. Other people listened.

:13:53. > :13:57.You need to listen, that is why today's debate is really important.

:13:58. > :14:01.We need to listen and be not defensive. My experience in criminal

:14:02. > :14:04.justice was the moment your organisation was criticised, you

:14:05. > :14:08.circle the wagons and try to protect what you think is good rather than

:14:09. > :14:16.accepting what might not be so good. We need a number -- nondefensive

:14:17. > :14:19.response, an open response and a determination. Jane parents asked me

:14:20. > :14:24.to go on the journey to change some of the things that have gone wrong

:14:25. > :14:27.with them. I am proud to call them friends and advocates in the

:14:28. > :14:32.continuing journey we are on. There are real lessons here and I look to

:14:33. > :14:35.the front bench opposite, there are real lessons about what has happened

:14:36. > :14:41.in the criminal justice world in the last 15 years and ask westerns as to

:14:42. > :14:48.why some of that cannot be replicated in the family courts and

:14:49. > :14:53.other courts, starting with listening in a nondefensive way and

:14:54. > :15:01.listening to the possibility for change. This is an issue that is

:15:02. > :15:05.rising up the agenda and it is the examples of perpetrators of domestic

:15:06. > :15:08.abuse who then use our courts, criminal and civil but civil is

:15:09. > :15:15.where the torch has not been shone. To continue the perpetration of

:15:16. > :15:22.control and harassment of the victims. I would like to page a bid

:15:23. > :15:32.to Claire Waxman, who has raised this issue on a number of occasions.

:15:33. > :15:37.-- paid tribute. The first is the person who has no interest in the

:15:38. > :15:42.proceedings at all but doing it to ensure the person they are stalking

:15:43. > :15:50.or harassing is forced to come to court to strike their claim out. The

:15:51. > :15:54.court will strike the claims out when the court gets to grips with it

:15:55. > :15:58.as a vexatious claim but the victim has to go to court to argue that it

:15:59. > :16:04.is vexatious. That is all the perpetrator wants. To force someone

:16:05. > :16:09.to come to court. It happened to Clare Waxman and other victims. This

:16:10. > :16:13.can be solved by Christmas, I am busy looking straight across to the

:16:14. > :16:16.opposition front bench, that it ought to be possible, working for

:16:17. > :16:21.the senior judiciary to devise a way to ensure these cases have a special

:16:22. > :16:28.strike at procedure that doesn't require the victim to come to court

:16:29. > :16:32.to take the initiative. To have some other third party to do it. With a

:16:33. > :16:37.month or two's hard work, a system could be put in place to deal with

:16:38. > :16:43.that and simply put that problem on one side with some real courage and

:16:44. > :16:48.determination. The second is more difficult. That is where the

:16:49. > :16:53.perpetrator has an interest, maybe a child or some other aspect,

:16:54. > :16:57.therefore it is not possible to say that the individual simply shouldn't

:16:58. > :17:01.be allowed in court at all. In those circumstances, we would look at the

:17:02. > :17:03.special measures, support, a different way of arranging family

:17:04. > :17:09.courts and other courts to ensure they are not used for an ulterior

:17:10. > :17:15.motive. There is growing evidence that that is the case. Those are

:17:16. > :17:19.difficult cases but it must be possible to have support for victims

:17:20. > :17:21.and special measures and a more proactive role for judges. A big

:17:22. > :17:29.change in the criminal courts is that judges began to be more

:17:30. > :17:33.proactive and would feel a duty to provide a better situation for

:17:34. > :17:38.victims in court. These issues are not going to go away, they need to

:17:39. > :17:42.be solved, I think across the house, but I think now it takes listening,

:17:43. > :17:48.non-defensiveness and commitment to bring about change. In the criminal

:17:49. > :17:53.sphere, that has happened and it needn't take 15 years but lessons

:17:54. > :18:01.from one jurisdiction can be taken to the other. As often is the case

:18:02. > :18:06.in the main chamber, I am usually the last big. I look forward to

:18:07. > :18:13.making a contribution and can I first say how touched I was by the

:18:14. > :18:15.contributions of all the Right honourable and honourable members of

:18:16. > :18:26.this house. Particularly the honourable lady who set the scene

:18:27. > :18:32.from Penistone and Stockbridge. To say this as well, other members,

:18:33. > :18:35.through the stories they have as MPs, relating to their own

:18:36. > :18:40.constituents, have very eloquently and powerfully in this chamber today

:18:41. > :18:53.have put their cases forward and it is good to have those on record as

:18:54. > :18:59.well. Many will have felt the heartache and no stories today. I

:19:00. > :19:02.would like to speak from a Northern Ireland angle as I always do in this

:19:03. > :19:05.house. The figures in Northern Ireland, I wish I could say they

:19:06. > :19:11.were better but unfortunately they are not. When you hear some of the

:19:12. > :19:20.stats, you will understand what some of the problems are that we have

:19:21. > :19:22.back home. It requires much thought and consideration and affects far

:19:23. > :19:27.too many homes and families in the United Kingdom. The statistics are

:19:28. > :19:33.shocking, during this contribution, for myself and others from across

:19:34. > :19:35.the UK, police will have received ten calls at least regarding

:19:36. > :19:40.domestic abuse, that is simply horrific to me. Multiply those ten

:19:41. > :19:44.calls for every member who has spoken and you'll get an idea of the

:19:45. > :19:49.number of domestic abuse cases that have taken place since this debate

:19:50. > :19:58.started just after 1p. In Northern Ireland in 2014-15, 11 2000

:19:59. > :20:05.incidents reported to the P S and I. Police responded to domestic

:20:06. > :20:08.incidents every day. -- P S N ire. I am not sure the reasons for that,

:20:09. > :20:15.people with much more knowledge will explain that. It may be down to a

:20:16. > :20:18.conflict of some 30 years and may be down to the economic changes that

:20:19. > :20:21.have taken place. It is certainly down to society that there was peer

:20:22. > :20:30.pressure and all of the things that happened have come up on us and make

:20:31. > :20:38.relationships difficult to make safe and compatible. Some 30,000 domestic

:20:39. > :20:42.abuse crimes were committed, 13% of all crime in Northern Ireland. That

:20:43. > :20:46.puts it in perspective as well, looking at those figures. In that

:20:47. > :20:51.year, six murders had a domestic abuse motivation. That represented

:20:52. > :20:57.37.5% of all murders in Northern Ireland. Domestic abuse in Northern

:20:58. > :21:03.Ireland, statistically, is a very negative and the figures indicate

:21:04. > :21:10.that. Over two and a half times as many domestic abuse crimes, of

:21:11. > :21:13.13,000 were much higher than drug offences. We know how important it

:21:14. > :21:19.is to deal with drugs but in that period of time, there were 5000 drug

:21:20. > :21:26.offences and 13,426 domestic abuse cases. There were more domestic

:21:27. > :21:39.abuse cases than burglary, which topped out at 9000. There were 2734

:21:40. > :21:46.offences of rape, again, very worrying figures. There were multi

:21:47. > :21:55.agency risk assessment cases have been discussed, of which, some

:21:56. > :21:59.10,000 856 children living in the household, 7009 and 55 cases, the

:22:00. > :22:12.victims were female. I want to give some of the sample is, without

:22:13. > :22:24.mentioning any names. A case of one lady in in my constituency, she has

:22:25. > :22:29.two children. Her husband and her became estranged and he became

:22:30. > :22:33.violent. He would wait at the back door one night with a sledgehammer

:22:34. > :22:37.and smashed the door. The police responded very quickly, within five

:22:38. > :22:43.minutes they were there. And they arrested him and took him away. That

:22:44. > :22:47.relationship broke down but not only is it the violence perpetrated on

:22:48. > :22:53.the doorstep, in many cases, it is the trauma and the emotional

:22:54. > :22:54.situation for the woman and the children herself that macro

:22:55. > :23:09.themselves. Another case of an ex-partner who

:23:10. > :23:17.was pursued by her ex-at her home, work and on the streets. Almost to a

:23:18. > :23:24.case where she was fearing for her life. She took her own life, we have

:23:25. > :23:31.to look at the side-effects of what happens. That is one of the things

:23:32. > :23:37.that happen. Stop me if I am wrong but there is a massive issue across

:23:38. > :23:40.the whole of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

:23:41. > :23:48.and we must make changes to handle this in the best way possible. In

:23:49. > :23:52.2014, a report found that the police response to domestic abuse was not

:23:53. > :23:57.good enough and that the responses were inconsistent. An inspection in

:23:58. > :24:02.2015 found some positive changes had taken place but there was still room

:24:03. > :24:08.for improvement. That is why we are in this chamber today visiting the

:24:09. > :24:12.issue again and I know the Minister and his response will give an idea

:24:13. > :24:19.of how that improvement has taken place.

:24:20. > :24:31.There has been a theme throughout, that everyone is particular to their

:24:32. > :24:35.own person but nonetheless they do constitute the term of domestic

:24:36. > :24:40.violence and it covers a multitude of sins. Each case should be treated

:24:41. > :24:49.in an individual way and there must be a scheme in place that allows it

:24:50. > :24:52.to happen. When many cases do not end up in court as the victim is

:24:53. > :24:58.unwilling to testify and that happens in many of the cases that I

:24:59. > :25:05.have in my office, they fall out, they drift apart, then back together

:25:06. > :25:09.again and the difficulties continue with all the stories and apologies

:25:10. > :25:14.that the partner makes towards the lady concerned. There are some that

:25:15. > :25:19.do not find the strength to face their abuser and it is for them that

:25:20. > :25:24.I stand today and ask how much more we can do for them. I understand

:25:25. > :25:28.there has to be changes to the statue of limitations and that has

:25:29. > :25:35.to be welcomed, but again what more can we do on that side? We need to

:25:36. > :25:41.recognise that domestic violence is not against women and children.

:25:42. > :25:44.Women's Aid have released their stats of the year before which paint

:25:45. > :25:52.a picture of the different scenarios that they deal with everyday and

:25:53. > :26:05.with this debate today would concur. The helpline which they run and they

:26:06. > :26:10.received some 27,000 calls, the majority continue to be from women,

:26:11. > :26:17.the majority are women by far. The percentage of male callers rose by

:26:18. > :26:25.some 2.2%. There were 611 sexual violence calls on the line.

:26:26. > :26:31.Sometimes men themselves also have to contact the organisation and we

:26:32. > :26:40.want to put that focus into this debate. 262 calls came from foreign

:26:41. > :26:49.nationals. 35 calls came from the LGBT community. 58% of women callers

:26:50. > :26:54.disclosed mental health issues. 226 children were referred to Women's

:26:55. > :27:00.Aid refugees. I would like to pay tribute to Women's Aid and what they

:27:01. > :27:06.do in my constituency. They are marvellous, they are very responsive

:27:07. > :27:12.and very able to, and I always encourage the Northern Ireland

:27:13. > :27:22.assembly to give money there as well. I can understand there appears

:27:23. > :27:25.to be an almost overwhelming task of creating a system which can help

:27:26. > :27:29.different types of domestic violence, there is one thing that is

:27:30. > :27:37.needed and that is the case of compassion. We need to ensure that

:27:38. > :27:42.all responders understand that we cannot understand why some victim 's

:27:43. > :27:46.go back to their abusers. They deserve and need no less help and

:27:47. > :27:49.compassion than anyone else. People need to know there is a safe place

:27:50. > :27:53.and help available any time and that we have a system in place that will

:27:54. > :28:01.aid people in getting their lives together. Women's Aid, which is an

:28:02. > :28:04.independent body, the housing, the police, social services and all the

:28:05. > :28:10.organisations and charities that work together, a big thank you to

:28:11. > :28:17.all of them. In conclusion, this is a big problem that is complex but is

:28:18. > :28:22.something we must indeed in this House that once the change necessary

:28:23. > :28:28.for those who need it most. We must do our best to make it better for

:28:29. > :28:37.them and it is my belief the hard work must begin in this place today.

:28:38. > :28:42.Thank you. I want to start off by congratulating my honourable friend

:28:43. > :28:50.the member for Penistone and stocks bridge along with the chair of the

:28:51. > :28:55.women and equality committee, the member for Basingstoke and all the

:28:56. > :29:00.members who have together secured this vital debate today. I would

:29:01. > :29:03.also like to thank the backbench business committee for forwarding

:29:04. > :29:12.members time in the chamber to discuss this vital issue in the

:29:13. > :29:16.chamber. Listening to today's discussion, we can all agree that

:29:17. > :29:21.the contributions have been powerful, moving, thought-provoking

:29:22. > :29:28.and well-informed. I also want to take this opportunity to pay tribute

:29:29. > :29:35.as other members have done to Claire Throssell and thank her for all her

:29:36. > :29:40.work with Women's Aid in trying to ensure that other mothers are

:29:41. > :29:46.protected in a way which tragically Claire and her children were not.

:29:47. > :29:50.The issues that were discussed today have been much in focus in recent

:29:51. > :29:53.weeks and months as has been mentioned by my honourable friend

:29:54. > :29:59.the member for Birmingham Yardley, the storyline in the archers has

:30:00. > :30:03.dominated the news cycle in the last week and it is inspiring that a

:30:04. > :30:09.charity appeal inspired by this radio show and that storyline has

:30:10. > :30:17.raised over ?150,000 for the charity. I read this week the tragic

:30:18. > :30:23.case of Mary Shipston whose estranged father murdered her before

:30:24. > :30:29.taking his own life. She and her mother had fled a life of violence

:30:30. > :30:34.and were living in a safe house. It was an act described by the serious

:30:35. > :30:38.case review which examined what happened as to quote a spite

:30:39. > :30:46.killing, cynically designed to take the child from her mother and leave

:30:47. > :30:51.an indelible memory of Mary's death. Another high-profile case was the

:30:52. > :30:54.case mentioned by the honourable member for Sutton and Sheen, the

:30:55. > :31:00.case of Ellie Butler who was murdered by her father following her

:31:01. > :31:08.return to her parents. These events are events which no mother, no

:31:09. > :31:12.family should endure and it is important as my honourable friend

:31:13. > :31:15.for Penistone and Stockbridge told the backbench business committee

:31:16. > :31:21.when she applied for this debate that the voices of these women are

:31:22. > :31:26.heard, and I want to give a special congratulations to my honourable

:31:27. > :31:31.friend the member for Penistone and Stockbridge because she today in her

:31:32. > :31:36.speech fulfilled what she promised, she made sure that the voices of

:31:37. > :31:41.these women were heard and in fact she puts on Parliamentary record the

:31:42. > :31:46.very words of clear that we heard earlier today. I want to

:31:47. > :31:51.congratulate Women's Aid on publishing this urgent and important

:31:52. > :31:58.work, 19 charges homicides 12 years on from a similar shocking report.

:31:59. > :32:03.Much time may have passed since the publication of that report 12 years

:32:04. > :32:08.ago and although progress has been made, in respect of domestic

:32:09. > :32:13.violence and in respect of family courts, much more as we have heard

:32:14. > :32:19.today needs to be done. That 2004 report influenced the landscape of

:32:20. > :32:23.the family courts on its publication and there is every reason to hope

:32:24. > :32:29.following the debate today that this latest report will have a big effect

:32:30. > :32:36.also and as we have heard from my honourable friend the member for

:32:37. > :32:39.Hove, there does need to be a transformation of our family courts.

:32:40. > :32:44.The court system and the family courts need to be an arena for

:32:45. > :32:50.justice not a weapon which those who have been wronged can seek to

:32:51. > :32:55.inflict further pain on those who have been wronged. The case studies

:32:56. > :32:59.described in the report are truly shocking. All the perpetrators are

:33:00. > :33:04.fathers to the children they murdered and more in the context of

:33:05. > :33:08.child contact whether informally or formally arranged between the

:33:09. > :33:13.parties. The cases to which the Women's Aid report refer ten to show

:33:14. > :33:17.a deeply, deeply concerning pattern in which each of the fathers

:33:18. > :33:26.involved were actually known to agencies as perpetrators of domestic

:33:27. > :33:31.abuse. The report makes clear that its findings show a culture of

:33:32. > :33:38.contact to all costs has arisen unfortunately in our family courts

:33:39. > :33:43.and yet as long ago as 2006, the then Lord Justice Wall said in

:33:44. > :33:47.response to the first report from Women's Aid on this subject, and

:33:48. > :33:51.these are his words, it is in my view high time that the family

:33:52. > :33:56.justice system abandoned any reliance on the proposition that a

:33:57. > :34:02.man can have a history of violence to the mother of his children but

:34:03. > :34:08.nonetheless be a good father. It is against that background, against

:34:09. > :34:13.that background that is particularly alarming that Women's Aid has found

:34:14. > :34:18.that abuse of a mother by a partner or husband is still being viewed by

:34:19. > :34:26.the justice system is somehow a separate issue from the child's

:34:27. > :34:32.safety. Anyone reading this report would surely agree that a review is

:34:33. > :34:35.fundamentally necessary, but as Shadow Justice Secretary I was

:34:36. > :34:42.struck in particular by the barriers to ensuring that granting of child

:34:43. > :34:50.contact is safe as identified by the report. Access to justice is now

:34:51. > :34:55.access at all if it does not also include access to advice and access

:34:56. > :35:02.to representation as my honourable friend the members for Sheffield has

:35:03. > :35:05.mentioned by the way. The coalition government has inflicted large cuts

:35:06. > :35:15.on the legal aid budget and private family law cases were no exception

:35:16. > :35:18.to this damaging trend. Although the Government introduced interim

:35:19. > :35:22.regulations for family legal aid earlier this year, the picture is

:35:23. > :35:29.scarcely changed. Those seeking publicly funded legal representation

:35:30. > :35:33.must provide evidence and the time limit for that evidence has been

:35:34. > :35:37.extended from two years to five years, but many will be left

:35:38. > :35:41.wondering why there is as we have heard today a time limit at all. It

:35:42. > :35:45.may be more appropriate for an assessment of relevance to be made

:35:46. > :35:53.rather than an arbitrary period of time. But it's the provision of

:35:54. > :35:56.evidence itself which causes difficulty and this report makes

:35:57. > :36:03.clear that much of the required evidence is either unavailable or

:36:04. > :36:08.unattainable. Practitioner groups I have met with also report reluctance

:36:09. > :36:12.by some professionals to put the required evidence in writing. Those

:36:13. > :36:17.that do sometimes find their form returned because it is not in the

:36:18. > :36:23.prescribed formats and the process begins yet again. At the time of the

:36:24. > :36:28.legal aid sentencing and punishment of offenders act 2012, the

:36:29. > :36:36.Government committed to a review of its effects within three to five

:36:37. > :36:42.years. To date not only has a review not been published, no such review

:36:43. > :36:48.has started. It is alarming that some 38% of women when not in a

:36:49. > :36:54.position to obtain the necessary evidence to persuade the legal aid

:36:55. > :36:59.agency that as a victims of domestic violence they should be eligible for

:37:00. > :37:05.legal aid, and over a quarter of those women had no option other than

:37:06. > :37:10.to represent themselves at court as litigants in person. That can mean

:37:11. > :37:14.as my honourable friend the member for Great Grimsby has outlined being

:37:15. > :37:20.cross-examined for by the perpetrators accused in court and

:37:21. > :37:24.the stress of having the sole responsibility for navigating the

:37:25. > :37:29.complex case law and legal processes. As my honourable friend

:37:30. > :37:33.the member for Birmingham Yardley mentioned, in the criminal courts,

:37:34. > :37:39.where a defendant has no legal representation, that defendant will

:37:40. > :37:44.be prevented and quite right also from cross examining a complainant

:37:45. > :37:49.who alleges domestic violence. Instead the court will appoint an

:37:50. > :37:53.advocate to conduct cross-examination paid for by public

:37:54. > :38:00.funds. If that is good enough in the can bus system, why is it not good

:38:01. > :38:04.enough in the family court system? At her first justice committee

:38:05. > :38:08.appearance last week, the new Justice Secretary stated that one of

:38:09. > :38:13.her three objectives was to realise a justice system which works for

:38:14. > :38:18.all, something with which we can all agree. If that is the case, the

:38:19. > :38:23.Secretary of State must turn her mind rapidly to the experiences we

:38:24. > :38:26.have heard today, the experiences of those in the family courts because

:38:27. > :38:33.the clear evidence of this report is that it is not working for all. To

:38:34. > :38:36.that end, I was disappointed to hear that the all party Parliamentary

:38:37. > :38:42.group on domestic violence has received no response to date to its

:38:43. > :38:49.report on domestic abuse, child contact and the family court and I

:38:50. > :38:52.do want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the work of the

:38:53. > :38:55.all-party Parliamentary group and its chair the member for Birmingham

:38:56. > :39:03.Yardley. I hope that they knew Justice

:39:04. > :39:08.Secretary will deem more. I hope she will take on the task of responding

:39:09. > :39:13.directly to the work of the APPG and considering carefully the seven

:39:14. > :39:22.recommendations that the eight PBG's report makes. As with the Women's

:39:23. > :39:26.Aid report, it emphasises the need for better adherence, to practice

:39:27. > :39:30.direction 12 J Wycherley as we've heard to protecting the child and

:39:31. > :39:37.the parent with whom they are living and to ensure the best interests of

:39:38. > :39:43.the child are elevated above other considerations when determining

:39:44. > :39:50.child contacts. Combating violence against women and girls must be, as

:39:51. > :39:57.my honourable friend, so eloquently outlined a priority for all parties.

:39:58. > :40:05.Labour's general election manifesto committed to establishing a commit

:40:06. > :40:08.up on sexual violence to influence priorities across all Government of

:40:09. > :40:12.our apartments. We said we would publish a violence against women and

:40:13. > :40:17.girls Bill and provide more stable central funding for women's refugees

:40:18. > :40:21.and rape crisis centres. As my honourable friend mentioned today,

:40:22. > :40:29.we do welcome the Government's change of position when it comes to

:40:30. > :40:32.women's refuge and the changes to housing benefit but fundamentally,

:40:33. > :40:36.the Government should heed this motion and the Government should

:40:37. > :40:46.implement a review as soon as possible. I commend this motion to

:40:47. > :40:49.the House. Thank you. I want not be taking interventions in an attempt

:40:50. > :40:53.to try to get through all of the questions that have been asked in

:40:54. > :40:57.this important debate so please forgive me and I do not at all of

:40:58. > :41:02.them I will be writing to you. Let me begin thanking the honourable

:41:03. > :41:08.member and other members or securing this debate. On a personal level, I

:41:09. > :41:12.believe that the member or Penistone and Stockbridge is an impressive

:41:13. > :41:17.member of Parliament and her core decency which was visibly display

:41:18. > :41:23.today came through and I think that is why she is such a valued member

:41:24. > :41:27.of this House. I recognise the strength of feeling on the subject

:41:28. > :41:32.of domestic abuse and the importance honourable members from all sides

:41:33. > :41:39.attach to addressing it. I think the more we talk about this issue be

:41:40. > :41:43.better, I'm very grateful for the opportunity to discuss such a

:41:44. > :41:46.pressing issue, not least because in clinical practice I have encountered

:41:47. > :41:51.a number of cases of domestic violence will stop they have been

:41:52. > :41:54.primarily women but I must say there are also men as well and I think

:41:55. > :41:59.there should be mentioned. I do think it is important today that we

:42:00. > :42:02.have contributed from both men and women. This is a problem that likes

:42:03. > :42:11.our society and we are all responsible for sorting it out. --

:42:12. > :42:15.lights. As the prime is a clear last week, tackling such abuse is a

:42:16. > :42:19.priority for the Government. This debate centres on an important

:42:20. > :42:24.report published in January of this year by Women's Aid, the report

:42:25. > :42:27.entitled 19 child homicides, calls on the Government to review the

:42:28. > :42:32.treatment of expense of victims of domestic abuse in the family law