Live Attorney General Questions

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:00. > :00:00.all the very best of luck in their competition in Costa Blanca. I wish

:00:00. > :00:00.them very well and I hope we will get an update from the honourable

:00:07. > :00:12.lady in due course. I feel sure that we will! Questions to the Attorney

:00:13. > :00:15.General. Thank you, Mr Speaker, question one.

:00:16. > :00:23.The Government has committed to the United Kingdom remaining a signatory

:00:24. > :00:26.to the European Convention on human rights for the duration of the

:00:27. > :00:29.Parliament. I thank the Attorney General for that answer and

:00:30. > :00:33.diarrhoea assured, but earlier this week he will know the UN High

:00:34. > :00:36.Commissioner for human rights described the Prime Minister's

:00:37. > :00:43.comments after the appalling attack on London Bridge as a gift to every

:00:44. > :00:48.despot who violates human rights under the pretext of fighting

:00:49. > :00:51.terrorism. Will the Attorney General recognise the danger of playing

:00:52. > :00:54.politics with human rights and accept that the Government needs to

:00:55. > :00:58.desist from doing it? The honourable gentleman won't be surprised to hear

:00:59. > :01:02.that I don't accept that is what is happening here. What I'm saying is

:01:03. > :01:06.that I would expect every member of the House to agree with, which is

:01:07. > :01:10.that human rights is a balance between human rights of all

:01:11. > :01:14.different people in our society. Everyone has the most important

:01:15. > :01:18.human rights of all, which is to live their life unabated by those

:01:19. > :01:22.who wish to do them harm through terrorism, and because of that, what

:01:23. > :01:25.the Prime Minister was saying, quite rightly in my view and I hope in

:01:26. > :01:28.his, that we have to make sure that we hope that balance continues to be

:01:29. > :01:36.struck correctly, and that is what we will do. The court behind this

:01:37. > :01:41.convention has tens of thousands of outstanding cases, and many of the

:01:42. > :01:47.so-called judges don't have any legal qualifications at all. Don't

:01:48. > :01:53.these two stark facts undermine the credibility of this organisation in

:01:54. > :01:57.holding up human rights at all? I think that my honourable friend and

:01:58. > :02:00.I would agree that the court in Strasbourg could sensibly reform and

:02:01. > :02:05.improve, but he will also recognise that we do not rely in this country

:02:06. > :02:11.solely on the court in Strasbourg to protect our human rights. Our

:02:12. > :02:20.Government and courts do that, too, and very effectively. The Strasbourg

:02:21. > :02:24.court has done excellent work over the years in putting forward the

:02:25. > :02:29.case with human rights in Central and Eastern Europe. The uncertainty

:02:30. > :02:34.of Britain's position will give succour to regimes like President

:02:35. > :02:41.Putin in Moscow, the presidents of Belarus etc, not the signal the

:02:42. > :02:44.British Government should be giving. I applaud all those who were to

:02:45. > :02:48.promote human rights whether within a court or elsewhere, but I think

:02:49. > :02:53.that it is important as I say that we understand that the European

:02:54. > :02:57.Convention on human rights itself permits derogations in certain

:02:58. > :03:05.circumstances. He I believe was the member of the Government that sought

:03:06. > :03:07.to do so in the weight of the 9/11 attacks, so it is certainly within

:03:08. > :03:11.the hierarchy and system of the European Court of Human Rights that

:03:12. > :03:16.that should be allowed, and we need to make sure that the balance I

:03:17. > :03:18.described earlier is maintained. The right to peaceful enjoyment of

:03:19. > :03:23.property is a valuable safeguard in the convention. Does the Attorney

:03:24. > :03:28.General agree with me that the SFO has a strong and growing reputation

:03:29. > :03:32.in upholding that right, and can he clarify his plans for the future? I

:03:33. > :03:35.certainly think that the Serious Fraud Office have an important role

:03:36. > :03:39.to play in doing what they can to deal with economic crime, as of

:03:40. > :03:44.course do other agencies, and as for the future, he will understand that

:03:45. > :03:48.we are looking very carefully at how we can improve performance in

:03:49. > :03:54.tackling economic crime across the whole range of different

:03:55. > :03:57.organisations that currently do so. What the Prime Minister said during

:03:58. > :04:02.the election campaign was that she was going to rip up human rights to

:04:03. > :04:04.fight terrorism. Can he confirmed that he has advised his Cabinet

:04:05. > :04:09.colleagues there is nothing in the Human Rights Act or the Convention

:04:10. > :04:11.on human rights that would prevent the Government taking a robust

:04:12. > :04:17.approach to terrorism, and therefore this plan to rip up human rights

:04:18. > :04:21.will be shelved? The Prime Minister said nothing of the kind. Let me

:04:22. > :04:24.read her exactly what she did say. We should do even more to restrict

:04:25. > :04:29.the freedom and movements of terrorist suspect when we have

:04:30. > :04:33.enough evidence to know that they were present a threat but not enough

:04:34. > :04:36.evidence to prosecute them in court, and if human rights laws get in the

:04:37. > :04:40.way of doing these things, we will change those laws to make sure we

:04:41. > :04:47.can do them. That seems to me to be eminently sensible, Mr Speaker. Mr

:04:48. > :04:52.Speaker, all cases in which offences may have been committed under the

:04:53. > :04:59.terrorism legislation are considered on their own merits by experienced

:05:00. > :05:01.specialist prosecutors and the CPS counter-terrorism division.

:05:02. > :05:06.Prosecution will go ahead when there is a realistic prospect of

:05:07. > :05:11.conviction and it is in the public interest. There are hundreds of

:05:12. > :05:15.British citizens or at least 100 including one of my constituents who

:05:16. > :05:31.has been to Syria and Iraq to fight against -- Daesh with the Peshmerga,

:05:32. > :05:36.and nobody seems able to work out whether the terrorism act should

:05:37. > :05:40.apply to them. Will he give greater guidance to the police forces in

:05:41. > :05:44.question so that no citizen is left in legal limbo? I congratulate my

:05:45. > :05:50.abnormal friend for the persistence with which he raises this, each case

:05:51. > :05:55.is different and must be considered on its own merits by the police and

:05:56. > :05:58.then in due course by the CPS, but in terms of guidance he will

:05:59. > :06:02.understand that it is difficult for politicians to set out guidance

:06:03. > :06:07.which will apply to each individual case. What he will also know is that

:06:08. > :06:11.in relation to cases where the effect of terrorism is felt abroad

:06:12. > :06:15.rather than in this country, those cases very often require my consent,

:06:16. > :06:19.and I will think about whether there is specifically guidance I can give

:06:20. > :06:21.as to what criteria I would take into account when considering

:06:22. > :06:27.particularly the public interest consideration in those cases. My

:06:28. > :06:31.constituents will be surprised that anyone who goes to Syria to fight

:06:32. > :06:35.isn't tracked and indeed isn't tagged when they get back. But is he

:06:36. > :06:39.aware that there is a real concern about how many people slip in and

:06:40. > :06:44.out of this country on borrowed or forged passports? I do understand

:06:45. > :06:49.that, and I think the message we must all try and give is that anyone

:06:50. > :06:54.attract to the idea of going to fight in Syria or in Iraq must be

:06:55. > :06:58.dissuaded from doing so. Partly of course because of the personal risk

:06:59. > :07:02.that he has described, but also because the picture here is

:07:03. > :07:06.exceptionally complicated, and organisations that may appear to be

:07:07. > :07:09.on the side of the Angels may not be so, and it is important that

:07:10. > :07:12.everybody understands the risks they are running, both legal and

:07:13. > :07:21.physical, by doing that sort of thing. Number three, Mr Speaker. The

:07:22. > :07:27.United Kingdom has a long-standing tradition of ensuring our rights and

:07:28. > :07:29.liberties are protected domestically and fulfilling our international

:07:30. > :07:37.human rights obligations. The decision to leave the European Union

:07:38. > :07:39.does not change this. The white paper is a vague in the details of

:07:40. > :07:45.the human rights protections currently afforded to all of us by

:07:46. > :07:51.EU regulations. Will he give us a full audit of those regulations and

:07:52. > :07:55.publish the results? Honourable lady will have to wait until the Bill is

:07:56. > :07:57.published, and she will be able to study it in detail and the House

:07:58. > :08:01.will be able to discuss it in detail. But she will appreciate the

:08:02. > :08:05.principle behind the Bill is wherever it is feasible and sensible

:08:06. > :08:11.to do so, we will transfer European rules and regulations into domestic

:08:12. > :08:15.law. They will become domestic law at that point and be in force and

:08:16. > :08:19.upheld by our own courts, and in my view that is a sensible way to do

:08:20. > :08:23.it. Across Eastleigh on the doorsteps during the election

:08:24. > :08:26.campaign, she human rights and the scaremongering around it came up

:08:27. > :08:31.time and again. Does the Minister agree with me that it is simply

:08:32. > :08:36.scaremongering, and leaving the EU will not change are human rights? I

:08:37. > :08:39.do agree with my honourable friend, it will not make a difference to the

:08:40. > :08:42.way in which human rights are defended in this country, and it is

:08:43. > :08:46.worth remembering and I'm sure she made this point on the doorsteps

:08:47. > :08:50.that this Government has a very good record in the defence of human

:08:51. > :08:56.rights, both domestic Lee and abroad. It was this Government that

:08:57. > :09:03.put forward a modern slavery Bill, the first in Europe, and it was this

:09:04. > :09:06.party, Conservatives in government that promoted the idea of sexual

:09:07. > :09:09.violence and conflict being something the world must take

:09:10. > :09:13.seriously. We are proud of that record and will continue. The

:09:14. > :09:16.Government's proposals published earlier this week on UK citizens and

:09:17. > :09:22.non-UK citizens after Brexit suggests that those who are not

:09:23. > :09:26.British citizens will have to have documentation to have access to

:09:27. > :09:30.public services, in other words, an ID card for some but not everyone.

:09:31. > :09:35.How can that possibly be consistent with the European Convention on

:09:36. > :09:38.human rights? I think we have to work through the practicalities of

:09:39. > :09:42.this. It will be important to understand how people demonstrate

:09:43. > :09:46.that they are who they say they are, but I don't accept that what this is

:09:47. > :09:49.going to lead to is a system of identity cards, and if he will

:09:50. > :09:52.recall, it was a Conservative government you got rid of the Labour

:09:53. > :09:58.idea of having identity cards in the first place. Human rights are

:09:59. > :10:03.defended by the European Union, but they weren't invented by the

:10:04. > :10:06.European Union, and as my right honourable friend has already said,

:10:07. > :10:10.this country has a good record in upholding them. Would he be

:10:11. > :10:14.interested to know that in Europe only nine EU countries, including of

:10:15. > :10:22.course the UK, still permit gay marriage? My honourable friend is

:10:23. > :10:27.always interesting, and no less so on this point. He is right and we

:10:28. > :10:31.should except on both sides of this how has that human rights are

:10:32. > :10:34.important and must be upheld, but our courts and judges and Government

:10:35. > :10:40.are perfectly capable of doing the job, as they have done so very well

:10:41. > :10:46.for a long time. Number four, please, Sir. Terrorism prosecutions

:10:47. > :10:50.are dealt with by specialist unit within the CPS, and there is close

:10:51. > :10:53.working between the CPS, the police and the intelligence services from

:10:54. > :11:02.the launch of an investigation until the conclusion of a trial. The 400

:11:03. > :11:09.or so radicalised British Muslims still in Syria fighting for Isis, we

:11:10. > :11:13.know their names, so what steps are now being taken to prepare for

:11:14. > :11:22.prosecutions? My honourable friend is right, we do have to pay close

:11:23. > :11:26.attention, in all of those cases it won't necessarily follow that there

:11:27. > :11:29.will be prosecutions, but the number of prosecutions carried out in

:11:30. > :11:34.terrorism cases have increased significantly, so last year there

:11:35. > :11:39.were 79 trials, but compares to 51 trials the year before, and we are

:11:40. > :11:45.remarkably good at convicting in those trials, the conviction rate is

:11:46. > :11:50.something like 86%. Since 2010, the CPS has lost 2400 staff, one third

:11:51. > :11:55.of its workforce, and 400 prosecutors. Is the Minister

:11:56. > :12:01.confident that he can meet the ever growing complexity of terrorism

:12:02. > :12:04.cases coming through now? Yes, and so is the Crown Prosecution Service,

:12:05. > :12:10.and the resource they have available to them to deal with

:12:11. > :12:13.counter-terrorism is increasing, and as I have indicated, the conviction

:12:14. > :12:17.rate in terrorism cases is high, and the conviction rate across all

:12:18. > :12:24.offences has remained remarkably stable over the period he is

:12:25. > :12:29.describing. Number five, Mr Speaker. With permission I will answer this

:12:30. > :12:32.question all on-site question eight. It is of paramount importance that

:12:33. > :12:36.bereaved families and injured people are properly involved and supported

:12:37. > :12:39.following the disaster. That is why we announced in the Queen's Speech

:12:40. > :12:41.that we will establish an independent public advocate to

:12:42. > :12:48.ensure that involvement and provide that support. Will he then tell me

:12:49. > :12:52.whether the independent advocate would be able to act for those

:12:53. > :12:55.affected by that contaminated blood scandal, and whether the idea of

:12:56. > :12:58.assistance and support, what exactly that means, and does it mean a

:12:59. > :13:04.publicly funded lawyer feature Amelie affected?

:13:05. > :13:09.I thank the honourable lady for that point, it depends on how quickly we

:13:10. > :13:12.as a parliament can pass the necessary legislation and it is

:13:13. > :13:16.certainly the intention of the Government that the independent

:13:17. > :13:20.advocates gets on with their work as quickly as possible. With regard to

:13:21. > :13:25.the specific point, each case will depend on its merits. Legal aid is

:13:26. > :13:28.already available for families with regards to certain procedures but I

:13:29. > :13:32.think the benefits of having a consolidated advocate would be to

:13:33. > :13:41.address the very questions she asks and I look forward to these issues

:13:42. > :13:43.being debated carefully when the legislation is brought forward. Can

:13:44. > :13:47.the Solicitor General confirmed that if families live in high-rise for

:13:48. > :13:51.example, but have thankfully not suffered the same disaster of

:13:52. > :13:56.Grenfell Tower, wished to bring any action on health and safety grounds

:13:57. > :14:01.they will be entitled to legal aid? I think the honourable lady again

:14:02. > :14:05.asks a general question about the merits of particular cases. If there

:14:06. > :14:10.are grounds, a judicial review procedure might be appropriate, then

:14:11. > :14:13.that application can be made. I think the important point in the

:14:14. > :14:18.context of this question is whether we can do more for families and

:14:19. > :14:24.bereaved relatives. I think we can and I think the precedent that is

:14:25. > :14:28.being set by the horrific events at Grenfell will allow us to learn

:14:29. > :14:35.important lessons that families have to be put first. Can the Solicitor

:14:36. > :14:39.General help with practicalities as to what discussions he is having

:14:40. > :14:44.with the bar Council and Law Society as to how an independent advocate

:14:45. > :14:48.might be identified, what levels of remuneration will be available so as

:14:49. > :14:53.to ensure proper equality of arms in representation, and by what means

:14:54. > :14:58.families will be able to give proper and fully discrete instructions. I

:14:59. > :15:03.thank my honourable friend for that question. I think it is vital we get

:15:04. > :15:08.these details right as we develop the policy. It is clear to the

:15:09. > :15:12.Government that the importance of having an equality advocacy so the

:15:13. > :15:20.right documents are obtained, so that proper challenges are made

:15:21. > :15:24.during the process is what we seek to achieve so fulfilling article six

:15:25. > :15:29.is at the heart of this. What assessment he may have made with

:15:30. > :15:37.regards to the efficacy of having an independent advocate after a tragedy

:15:38. > :15:41.such as Grenfell, in trying to get justice and truth for the victims

:15:42. > :15:46.coupled with the unhelpful remarks of the Shadow Chancellor which seems

:15:47. > :15:51.to be clouding the whole issue. I think it is vitally important at

:15:52. > :15:58.solemn and serious times like this that we all exercise our right to

:15:59. > :16:04.free speech responsibly, being mindful of criminal investigation is

:16:05. > :16:07.ongoing, and of course the inquest and public inquiry. We have to make

:16:08. > :16:13.sure we passed but high test and I'm afraid the Shadow Chancellor failed

:16:14. > :16:18.that in his remarks this week. I'm sure the Solicitor General would

:16:19. > :16:21.agree with me that it is vital that the independent public advocate has

:16:22. > :16:25.the powers they need to carry out the role. I pay great tribute to the

:16:26. > :16:29.work of the Hillsborough families over many years, but the Solicitor

:16:30. > :16:35.General will be aware that absolutely key to that was the

:16:36. > :16:39.findings of an independent panel to overturn the first inquest verdict.

:16:40. > :16:42.Will the Independent public advocate have the powers to appoint an

:16:43. > :16:50.independent panel if they see fit to do so? The honourable gentleman I

:16:51. > :16:55.think raises a very germane point and the Hillsborough precedent is

:16:56. > :16:59.one we need to bear in mind. I am keen to make sure the independent

:17:00. > :17:04.advocate has as powerful and meaningful role as possible. I think

:17:05. > :17:11.each case will depend on its merits but I am prepared to look at all

:17:12. > :17:15.detail including the one he raises. But the Solicitor General also agree

:17:16. > :17:19.that it is absolutely critical that there is all public confidence in

:17:20. > :17:23.the role of the independent public advocate? And as such, the role

:17:24. > :17:28.should be subject to appropriate scrutiny. Could he also promise the

:17:29. > :17:34.independent public advocate will replace reports before this House on

:17:35. > :17:39.an annual basis so members can look at the work in careful detail?

:17:40. > :17:43.Again, I can envisage like many other appointments of this kind the

:17:44. > :17:49.sort of accountability he talks about, and of course the publication

:17:50. > :17:53.of annual report is a regular and common occurrence in many other

:17:54. > :18:04.examples. So it is a particular point we will look at carefully.

:18:05. > :18:12.Question number six, Mr Speaker. With your permission I will answer

:18:13. > :18:16.this question alongside 7 and nine. As always the CPS has taken a number

:18:17. > :18:24.of steps to improve its prosecution of all strands of this kind of

:18:25. > :18:29.crime, including face-to-face training which is vital. Their hard

:18:30. > :18:34.work in this area has resulted in significant increases in the use of

:18:35. > :18:39.sentencing uplift in all strands of hate crime. In 2014 the Law

:18:40. > :18:44.Commission proposed disability hate crime should be given parity with

:18:45. > :18:49.other hate crimes in relation to aggravated offences and so-called

:18:50. > :18:52.stirring up offences. In November 2016 in a debate it was said the

:18:53. > :18:56.Government was reviewing that report. Can he update the House on

:18:57. > :19:04.when the Government will make a decision that is of importance to

:19:05. > :19:08.disabled people. The Government is particularly interested in the

:19:09. > :19:11.strand of work conducted by the previous home affairs select

:19:12. > :19:15.committee. We are looking to their success are committed to carry at

:19:16. > :19:18.work and we want this House to play its part in response of the Law

:19:19. > :19:22.Commission recommendations, and we very much hope that as soon as

:19:23. > :19:30.possible we can craft a suitable response to get them right. As has

:19:31. > :19:35.been stated, the Law Commission have previously called on the Government

:19:36. > :19:38.to review hate crime legislation so will the Government bring forward

:19:39. > :19:42.proposals for the review to ensure legislation in this area is

:19:43. > :19:48.effective and sufficiently broad in scope. The honourable gentleman is

:19:49. > :19:53.right to press the Government on these issues. My concerns are

:19:54. > :20:01.twofold, want to get the existing law properly enforced and used, and

:20:02. > :20:04.secondly to get the response of the Law Commission recommendations

:20:05. > :20:09.right. I want to make sure this House passes laws that are properly

:20:10. > :20:13.enforced. Too often in the past we have been too quick to pass laws

:20:14. > :20:16.that have failed expectations of those who deserve protection. But we

:20:17. > :20:23.will be looking at it as soon as possible. Reports of hate crime rose

:20:24. > :20:28.by 57% following Brexit, CPS staffing budgets have more than

:20:29. > :20:31.halved since 2010, is the Attorney General confident the CPS is

:20:32. > :20:35.adequately resourced to deal effectively with these reports and

:20:36. > :20:39.make sure victims of hate crime do get justice? I can reassure the

:20:40. > :20:42.honourable lady the trend with regard to the prosecution of hate

:20:43. > :20:50.crime continue to increase and particularly with regard to racial

:20:51. > :20:54.and religious aggravated hate crimes. There's over 13,000 cases

:20:55. > :21:03.now being prosecuted and that is reflected across the piece when it

:21:04. > :21:14.is too -- when it comes to homophobic and disability hate

:21:15. > :21:15.crime. Can my honourable friend tell the House what action the

:21:16. > :21:22.is taking to prevent the spread of is taking to prevent the spread of

:21:23. > :21:29.hate crime via social media? My honourable friend makes an important

:21:30. > :21:33.point, and come I reiterate again there is no distinction whatsoever

:21:34. > :21:37.between hate crime committed off-line and online, and just

:21:38. > :21:40.because somebody hides behind a pseudonym and pursues hate online,

:21:41. > :21:48.it doesn't mean the police and Crown Prosecution Service will track them

:21:49. > :21:51.down as we have seen in cases involving several members of this

:21:52. > :22:00.House who have been victims of appalling hate crime. Unless I

:22:01. > :22:09.misheard him, the honourable gentleman said Twitter was against

:22:10. > :22:14.his hair! That constitutes some sort of hate crime. I make that point for

:22:15. > :22:20.those interested in our proceedings. We are always interested in all

:22:21. > :22:25.matters pertaining to the Member for Lichfield. I'm not quite sure how to

:22:26. > :22:31.follow that but can my right honourable friend join me in

:22:32. > :22:42.recognising the work done by Hope Not Hate? This organisation and

:22:43. > :22:46.others play an important part to inform the process, and to help

:22:47. > :22:51.people report crime. Very often people will go to a third party

:22:52. > :22:54.before coming to the police but that is an absolutely acceptable way to

:22:55. > :22:58.report the crime because it means more crimes can be prosecuted. We

:22:59. > :23:02.have run late but I want to accommodate the last question on the

:23:03. > :23:12.paper, but no other. Mr Lawrence Robinson. Question Number Ten. The

:23:13. > :23:16.attorney and I referred 11 cases of burglary as unduly lenient. Only the

:23:17. > :23:19.most serious types of burglary and friends currently fall within the

:23:20. > :23:23.scheme but we have recommitted in our manifesto to extending the scope

:23:24. > :23:26.of the unduly lenient scheme and we will be working with the Lord

:23:27. > :23:37.Chancellor in order to implement that commitment. Given that only 10%

:23:38. > :23:40.of first time burglars actually receive immediate custodial

:23:41. > :23:45.sentences, doesn't that give a sort of encouragement to them to carry on

:23:46. > :23:51.their crimes, because burglary is quite a serious crime, and will he

:23:52. > :23:53.have a look at that statistic? My honourable friend is right to talk

:23:54. > :23:58.about burglary being a serious crime, it is a crime against the

:23:59. > :24:01.person, not just against property, because it affects people's

:24:02. > :24:07.wellbeing. Since the introduction of the revised sentencing council

:24:08. > :24:12.guidelines on burglary in 2012, the overall level of sentencing for

:24:13. > :24:15.burglary in terms of prison and length of sentences has increased

:24:16. > :24:18.and that should give his constituents some encouragement that

:24:19. > :24:26.the courts are taking these serious crimes with the appropriate

:24:27. > :24:30.punishment. Just before we come to business question, it might be

:24:31. > :24:40.helpful to the House if I announced my selection of amendments to be

:24:41. > :24:47.potentially voted upon much later today. I have selected the amendment

:24:48. > :25:03.from the official opposition, if memory serves me correctly,

:25:04. > :25:07.amendment L. I have a right to select up to a further two

:25:08. > :25:18.amendments under the terms of our standing orders and I can advise the

:25:19. > :25:21.House that I have selected amendment D in the name of the Member for

:25:22. > :25:23.Walthamstow and others,