30/10/2017 House of Commons

already just heard in this House the

failure of the mayor of London to

provide a single property for social

rent in the last year, so my

honourable friend is right to raise

this and we will certainly be taking

a much closer look.

We must now move

on to the next business. Colleagues,

I wish to make a statement about

recent disturbing allegations, about

a culture of sexual harassment at

Westminster. Between members and

those who work for members. Let me

make it clear.

There must be zero tolerance of

sexual harassment or bullying here

at Westminster or elsewhere. Whether

that involves members or their

staff, or parliamentary staff, or

those working on are visiting the

estate. If there have been assaults,

they should be reported to the

police here as anywhere else. The

House of Commons commission, which I

chair, has a duty to provide a safe

place to work.

In 2014, in addition to introducing

the respect policy, providing a

proper regime for complaints by

parliamentary staff, of bullying or

harassment, the commission provided

a helpline for members' staff to

raise personal and work-related

concerns. And I have consistently

supported the workplace equality

networks as peer group support for

staff. These have all been

established since 2010, and are

doing important work, which I know

to be valued by staff. At its

monthly meeting this evening, I will

be inviting the commission to

consider any further action. I also

propose to refer the whole issue of

sexual harassment to The Commons

reference group on representation

and inclusion, which I established

last year. Members' staff are of

course employed by individual

members. That means that they cannot

simply be treated as if they were

parliamentary employees. Nor of

course can members. I am therefore

glad that the party leaders have, in

statements made over the weekend,

acknowledged their responsibilities

to deal with such behaviour within

their respective parties. The Prime

Minister's letter to me, written as

leader of the Conservative Party,

very candidly admits the

difficulties the Conservative Party

has had in introducing the sort of

mandatory grievance scheme which

some other parties have introduced

in recent years. It does not require

my intervention for the party to

adopt an effective grievance scheme.

I hope that all parties will rapidly

and thoroughly reviewed the

arrangements which they have in

place to ensure that those

arrangements are credible,

enforceable, accessible, transparent

and comprise an independent element.

That latter notion that any

complaint system and grievance

procedure must satisfy constituents

as well as colleagues strikes me as

important. The Prime Minister refers

in her letter to the prospects for a

House wide scheme. I would be happy

to have the idea considered. In the

first instance, I hope that parties

will live up to their

responsibilities, demonstrating both

an appetite for change, and a

practical means of delivering that

change without delay. Make no

mistake. There is a need for change.

The House will also know that

members must abide by a code of

conduct which means that alleged

breaches can be investigated by the

parliamentary commission for

Standards. The Commissioner

suggested, in her September 2016

consultation on the code, a new rule

that, "A member must treat all those

who work in Parliament with dignity,

courtesy and respect." I hope that

the Standards Committee, comprising

equal numbers of members and lay

members, will take forward suggested

revisions to the cold with

appropriate urgency and come to the

House for its decision. -- revisions

to the code. I hope I have the

support of the House in calling for

these issues to be resolved swiftly

and decisively. It should not

require endless debate and

discussion. For my part as Speaker,

I am happy to do whatever I can.

Others must do likewise. Order.

Urgent question, Harriet Harman.

Of

the house will make a statement

about her plan -- of the house make

a plan to tackle this issue?

As you

know, Mrs B, I was very keen to come

to the chamber and make a statement

today but I am delighted instead to

respond to the right honourable lady

and grateful to you for inviting me

to provide a full response -- as you

know, Mr Speaker. It is absolutely

right that the House must address

the urgent issue of alleged

mistreatment of staff by members of

Parliament. These allegations make

clear there is a vital need to

provide better support and

protection for the thousands of

staff members working in Westminster

and in constituency offices across

the country. And in tackling this

problem, we also need to recognise

that we have interns, work

experience placements, House staff,

clerks and civil servants, all of

them deserve to be afforded our care

and respect. Mr Speaker, I can

confirm that the Cabinet Office is

urgently investigating reports of

specific allegations of misconduct,

in relation to the ministerial code.

I am well aware that the public

rightly expect MPs to display the

highest standards. As the Prime

Minister outlined in her letter

yesterday, there can be no place for

harassment, abuse or misconduct in

politics. Your age, gender or job

title should have no bearing on the

way you are treated in a modern

workplace, and nobody is an

exception to that. As the Nolan

principle has outlined, as public

servants we must demonstrate

accountability, openness and honesty

in our behaviour. Regardless of role

or position, a new approach will

need to cover everyone working for

Parliament. If someone is made to

feel uncomfortable or believes that

others have acted inappropriately

towards them, they should be able to

contact an external independent,

specially trained support team, via

phone, the intranet or face-to-face,

so that any issue can be raised in

confidentiality and appropriate

advice and support can be given.

Everyone in this House must be clear

that whenever a serious allegation

is made the individual should go to

the police and be supported in doing

so. However, it is clear that the

current system is inadequate. It is

for Parliament to come together to

resolve this, but the Government

believes there should be some

guiding principles. First, as in any

other workplace, everyone in

Parliament should have the right to

feel at ease as they go about their

work, irrespective of position, age

or seniority. Second, whilst we have

had a confidential helpline in place

for several years, it must now be

strengthened, as a dedicated support

team, made more accessible and given

more resources, and its role and

responsibilities highlighted to all

who work there. Third, the support

team should have the ability to

recommend onward referral of a case,

to ensure appropriate investigation

and action takes place. Fourth, the

support team should recommend

specialised pastoral support for

anyone experiencing distress as a

consequence of their treatment in

the workplace. Fifth, the support

team should strongly recommend

reporting any allegations which may

be criminal directly to the police.

Sixth, and in addition, there may be

further action which Government and

political parties themselves can

take to ensure high standards of

conduct, and that inappropriate

behaviour is properly dealt with.

This is the very least we can do.

As the Prime Minister outlined

yesterday in her letter to party

leaders, we must establish a House

wide mediation service, with a code

of conduct but and contractually

binding grievance procedure

available for all MPs and their

staff irrespective of their party

banner. This will reinforce to those

who work here and to the public that

we are serious in our treatment of

wrongdoing and in our support for

those who suffer it. I know all

party leaders will work together

with the House to reach an agreement

and get these changes in place as

soon as possible. As members of

Parliament, our constituents will be

rightly appalled at the thought that

some representatives in Parliament

may have acted in an entirely

inappropriate way towards others.

These reports risk bringing all of

our offices into disrepute. I know

this is an issue of great concern to

you, Mr Speaker, and I know you will

do everything you can to tackle this

issue. And I know that members from

all parties will want to work

alongside you to investigate every

claim, provide the right support in

the future, and make sure this never

happens again. Mr Speaker, it is

right, not a privilege, to work in a

and respect the environment. These

steps will ensure Parliament takes a

zero tolerance approach. Parliament

must take action in days, not weeks.

Thank you.

Can I fully endorse the words that

you said and thank you for the

commitment that you have always

shown on these issues and I thank

the leader of the House for her

answer. She's right. There is

obviously a problem. It's a good

thing actually that it's being

exposed and it has to be dealt with.

No woman or man for that matter

coming to work in this House should

be subjected to unwanted sexual

advances from those who are in a

position of power over them. No one

should have to work in the toxic

atmosphere of sleazy sexist or

homophobic banter. No MP, let alone

a Minister, should think it's

something to make jokes about. This

is not hysteria, this is something

which is long overdue for all the

parties in this House to deal with.

Shuz she agree that all parties

should agree on clear strict rules

about what is not acceptable, make

sure everyone knows about it and

that there has to be independence in

adjudicating complaints? Does she

recognise that it's almost

impossible for someone at the bottom

of the system to complain and make

allegations about someone at the

top? And that gives those at the top

impunity which some, few, but some

will take advantage of. A young

researcher would fear that if she

made an allegation about an MP she

would be plastered all over the

newspapers and never get another

job. A young journalist would know

that if she made an allegation about

a Cabinet Minister she would be

subjected to an immediate assault on

her integrity and that would be the

only thing that anyone ever

remembered her for thereafter. So we

must have complainant anonymity at

the heart of this. Above all, does

she recognise as we all must that

members of this House have an

immensely important job and great

responsibility to speak up for our

constituents, to hold the Government

to account, that is what we are here

for. No one voted for me to come to

this House to engage in high jinxs.

No one elected any of us to engage

in sleazy oppressive behaviour so it

has to be stopped and now is the

time to do it.

Thank you, and I

absolutely share the right

honourable lady's concerns about

allegations and I also share her

determination to stamp this out. We

absolutely are determined to get a

grip on this. She is right that all

parties must agree on the rules and

that there must be an independent

grievance procedure. I absolutely

share the concern that particularly

for young people coming to work or

to have work experience in this

place it is very difficult for them

to put themselves forward with

allegations for fear of what might

happen to them and that has been the

case throughout all areas of life

where those in power seek to abuse

those who are younger and less

powerful than they are and it is

absolutely appalling and

unforgiveable. I also share her view

that complainants should be given

anonymity and there should be proper

and thorough investigations of all

complaints.

Thank you very much. Can I also

congratulate you on your comments

and endorsement, Mr Speaker, endorse

the comments of the right honourable

lady opposite and the leader of the

House for all she has said. We do

indeed need change. Things can't go

on as they are. I welcome very much

the notion that we are going to set

up an independent grievous procedure

to provide protection to everybody

who works in this place in the same

way any other worker would have.

Would she look at extending consider

- consider extending it to every

parliamentary pass holder or

parliamentary e-mail account holder?

Would she also set down a timetable

and would she also agree with me

that this is not just about sexual

harassment. It extends to other

forms of abuse and it's important

that we recognise that.

My

honourable friend is exactly right,

this must include all pass holders,

in fact, those who come to this

House for work experience also and

indeed those members of the media

and so on who come to the House is

absolutely clear that there needs to

be a proper means of coming forward

with grievances. I think she's also

right that it's not just a matter of

sexually inappropriate behaviour but

also bullying accusations and all

manner of inappropriate behaviour,

it should be all encompassing and

that's what we intend to achieve.

Thank you. Can I start by thanking

the honourable member for Camberwell

and Peckham for raising this very

important issue. 35 years in this

place and she's trying to take

society forward in a leap. Can I

also thank you, Mr Speaker, for your

statement and welcome the leader of

the House's statement and to thank

her for sight of her statement

before. We on the opposition Labour

Party are ready to work with the

Government and all parties. The

leader of the opposition made a

statement at the weekend saying that

committing the Labour Party to do

such a thing. We all need to come up

with an appropriate safeguarding

policy for everyone who works in

this place. The Prime Minister

mentioned in her letter to you, Mr

Speaker, that there may have to be a

new body, any new body has to

encompass everyone who works in the

House. A body that can look at

complaints about members, the staff

of the House, including contractors

on the estate, and with members of

the other place. And work with trade

unions who certainly helped the

Labour Party to draw up our code of

conduct. There must be due process,

any allegations must be made and

there is a proper process of

investigation. Some may be referred

to the police, if they are serious

allegations. If there is a

streamlined process, then

everybody's aware of it. I know the

House currently has the employee

assistant programme which was set up

by you in 2014, Mr Speaker, for

members' staff, who have a free

confidential phone line but it needs

to go further. The newed abouty

needs to build on that and I know

the leader of the House made a

number of recommendations, I would

say that needs to be looked at by a

working party or another body to

that we ensure we don't react but

deal with it appropriately. Could I

ask the leader if she can make sure

that the House looks at widening the

scope of this helpline to include

independent advice, including legal

advice on the next steps for the

complainant? Because all that

helpline can currently do now is to

give counselling for the claimants.

And then refer the matter to

parties. I am not clear what other

parties do, but the position with

the opposition Labour Party is that

we have a code of conduct that is

signed up by every single member of

the party, that's MPs, and members

of the party. This has been sent

around a number of times since I was

first elected in 2010 and I know

it's been sent around again today.

So that if anyone wants to raise

anything under the code of conduct

it says that the matter is referred

to the head of complaints of the

Labour Party who will look at the

nature of the complaint. Could I

also turn to and ask the leader of

the House as the Prime Minister is

here, to the letter that was sent to

the Prime Minister, if she has seen

the letter from my honourable friend

the Shadow member for women and

equalities, those issues where a

Minister has broken the Ministerial

Code, that the person was actually a

Minister at the time? And could the

Prime Minister's response be placed

in the library? It is not acceptable

now in society where women are not

treated equally, even when we do the

same work. It is not acceptable that

names for women's anatomy are used

as swear words and it is not

acceptable that every time

unacceptable behaviour is

challenged, it is closed down as

political correctness. I know all of

us, every single one of us, on all

sides of the House, will use our

strength and our experience to

protect the vulnerable.

Thank you

and I absolutely share the

honourable lady's concerns and I was

very pleased when we met earlier

today that we are absolutely in the

same place in terms of a

determination to tackle this issue

very quickly. In specific response

to her particular issues, yes, I

think she's right that the House

does need to look at broadening the

resources available to the helpline

so that staff in this place can get

better support and more advice. I

can tell the honourable lady that

the Prime Minister hasn't yet seen

the letter from the opposition women

and equalities spokeswoman but will

look at that carefully of course, I

do share the concern about the way

in which women's anatomy is referred

to see a swear word, it's

frustrating ap irritating for women

and men, but I also think we must

recognise that this issue doesn't

just affect women t also affects

men, in dealing with the problems

across both Houses we need to have

respect for all people, women and

men. Thank you.

I should

congratulate the right honourable

and learned member, the member for

Camberwell and Peckham, I think she

marked and I think celebrated the

anniversary of her election to the

House. October 28th? It's a very

remarkable achievement.

Can I

welcome the statement that my right

honourable friend the leader of the

House has made today and

particularly the leadership shown

shown by the Prime Minister on this

issue. Can I welcome the idea of an

independent grievance procedure for

everybody who works in this place

but can I also gently remind members

here today that two-thirds of girls

in our schools experience sexual

harassment on a regular basis, that

half of university students

experience sexual harassment, that

half of women in work experience

sexual harassment, so could I ask

the leader of the House what more

support she might be able to give to

debates on those issues in this

place and encouraging the Government

to take action and you will be aware

of the fact, Mr Speaker, that the

member for Yardley - Birmingham

Yardley and I are holding a debate

in the chamber on Thursday on the

issue of sexual harassment in

schools.

My right honourable friend

raises an incredibly important point

which is really just highlighting

that what we do in this House sets a

role model and an example to those

out in the rest of the country and

in particular at a time when we are

so concerned about sexual harassment

in schools, it is pretty poor show

if we can't sort out our own House.

I think my right honourable friend

raises an incredibly important

point.

Can I very much welcome the

statement from the leader of the

house and indeed your statement, Mr

Speaker, which helpfully makes a

positive way forward and can we say

we support a whole House response to

this in establishment of a grievance

procedure. Abuse or sexual

harassment in any form must be

condemned in the strongest possible

terms and this House is no exception

to that. The Scottish National Party

gress that we must adopt a zero

tolerance approach and we will be

ensuring in the Scottish parliament

any issue will be robustly

investigated and the First Minister

today has written to the presiding

officer of the Scottish parliament

in regard to this. Could I ask the

leader of the House to confirm and

perhaps tell us more about plans to

involve all the parties in this

House. And perhaps tell us how these

talks could be progressed and does

she agree that all staff working on

the estate must have access to

information, impartial advice and a

means of raising these concerns in a

safe space is created so that any

concerns can be raised

confidentially right now immediately

after the statement. Finally, does

she agree this is a watershed moment

for this House, this is an

opportunity for an institutional

shift where the historic culture of

this House can positively be tackled

and that there must be no suggestion

that this House considers itself

above any investigation.

I am

grateful to the honourable gentleman

for his contribution. He asked what

plans there are to involve all

parties. Obviously, this is all very

recent news and it's vital that we

tackle it very urgently and so there

will be meetings arced between all

parties in the very near future, I

mean within days to make sure that

we are all agreed on a common

approach. He is absolutely right

that all staff must have suitable

information and a safe space. I do

urge people if they have allegations

or if they feel that they have been

made to feel uncomfortable that they

do come forward and speak to either

my office or perhaps to their whip

or to your office, Mr Speaker, and

it is absolutely essential that

people feel they have somewhere to

go and he is right to point out that

again that the employee helpline

must be more widely communicated to

staff and we will see that that is

the case. He finally makes the point

that this is an opportunity for

parliament to show that we can react

quickly to problems and take a

quantum leap forward in our approach

to dealing with this terrible issue

and I would like to think that we

can and will do just that.

Can I pay tribute to the leader of

the House and the Prime Minister for

grappling with this issue so very

swift slip. The leader of the House

talked about this being a modern

workplace. Isn't that the rub,

because this isn't a modern

workplace, it's a very strange

workplace. It's strange for members,

it's strange for our families, but

most of all it's very strange for

those members of staff and you

hinted at that when you tacked about

Members of Parliament being

individual employers. There are 650

different employment relationships.

Can I urge the leader of the House

to reflect on the fact any new

organisation which must be

independent needs to be nimble

enough to reflect on how this place

actually works, to deliver the

institutional shift that the

honourable gentleman has talked

about and must not be like a costing

of £6 million a year on the taxpayer

£6 million a year.

My right honourable friend is

absolutely right. Any new Crosshouse

body will need to be nimble, will

need to have the understanding of

parliamentary procedures, and will

also need to offer good value for

taxpayers' money.

With the leader of

the House except that in any debate

on sexual harassment there is too

much victim blaming that happens?

Women who are blamed for not

speaking out about harassment,

rather than asking why they didn't.

Young women we have seen who did

speak out being targeted with ideas

on social media, and if we are going

to get the right kind of reforms,

independent reforms, the processes,

or the right kind of culture change,

not just in this place but in

institutions right across the

country, there has to be a much

stronger voice in those reform

debates for the young women and men

and the junior staff who too often

end up being the victims of

unacceptable abuses of power? Their

voices must be heard.

Yes, the right

honourable lady makes a very good

point, that it is vital that victims

feel they have a safe place to bring

forward allegations, and that they

are not the ones who end up being

blamed, either for failing to come

forward, or for presumably making

false allegations, which too often

seems to be the case. And I would

actually highlight the situation for

my honourable friend who tried to

raise some issues of allegation and

herself suffered unbelievable abuse

for it. It is an appalling cultural

trend in this country, and it really

has to stop.

Sadly, for those of us

that have been in the House for some

time, we know there is nothing new

about the exchanges today. I

therefore welcome the statement, and

that of the leader of the House, and

the Prime Minister's intervention,

and indeed I have agreed with all

the exchanges across the House

today. Can we not forget that it

applies to both Houses? Can we not

forget it applies to a constituency

staff and people beyond your? And

can I urge, as my honourable friend

the member for blocks studied

earlier on, can I urge the Leader of

the Houster, with the timescale,

because I think the matter is

pressing? -- the member for blocks

all. But for everyone who works in

this estate are connected to it,

what the interim procedures are for

those individuals who may be at the

receiving end of the appalling

treatment we have been reading about

in the papers.

My right honourable

friend mentions the fact that any

new procedure needs to cover both

Houses, and she is right. It needs

to cover all staff working here and

in our constituencies, and she is

absolutely right. She also seeks

interim procedures to be clarified,

which we will absolutely do, but I

would just like to point out to her

that my right honourable friend the

Prime Minister has absolutely

gripped this issue, and whilst it

may have been rumbling on for many

years, I think we should all be

pleased that we will be addressing

it in the very near future.

I

welcome these steps to eradicate

harassment from this place, but when

I complained recently to an officer

of Parliament, who had some

responsibility in this area, that I

knew a number of researchers, male

and female, who had been made to

feel deeply uncomfortable in the

sports and social club here by

members of parliament, I was told

that that happens in pubs all over

the country. With the leader of the

House confirmed that the duty of

care that we owe extends 24/7 to

every restaurant and bar in this

place.

Well, I'm very happy to give

that absolute assurance. They should

be no place here on the estate or in

our constituency offices where

people can be abused or where their

allegations are not taken seriously,

and I can ensure the honourable lady

that I will be meeting with the Lord

to discuss the specific issues

around the sports and social bar

tomorrow.

Can I thank you for your

statement, Mr Speaker, and indeed

for the consensus in all the

statements that have so far been

made and questions raised in these

exchanges? But can I just point out,

we wouldn't be having these

exchanges if this code, the code of

conduct of the House of Commons, was

actually working, and if the

machinery around this code was

effective? Can I draw my right

honourable friend's attention to the

fact that the Parliamentary

Commissioner for Standards is

conducting a review of the code of

conduct? And that the public

administration and public affairs

committee has submitted quite

radical suggestions about how the

code and the machinery around it

should be reformed, so that we spend

far more time in this House as MPs

experiencing proper professional

development and understanding the

code of values at the front of this

document, and what they actually

mean and how we should live those

values as members of Parliament,

rather than just concentrating on

all the other pages which are about

declarations of outside earnings,

members' interests and all the rest,

which seems to preoccupy the

regulatory authorities of this

House?

Yes, my honourable friend is

absolutely right to raise the fact

that there is already a code of

conduct, and I'm grateful to him for

sending me his committee's report on

that matter over the weekend. It is

certainly something I will be

looking at Caerphilly over the next

couple of days.

-- looking at

Caerphilly over the next couple of

days. Much has been made this

weekend over the standards

commission and the committee looking

into many of the issues raised over

the last week. However, in a report

debated in March 2012 the committee

tried to give the commission a wider

scope over these issues and an

amendment was tabled by the three

major parties parliamentary shop

stewards and supported by the front

benches and was introduced to block

this, and therefore the commission

was left unable to look into these

very important issues. When the

Standards Committee reform shortly

we will again be looking at the code

of conduct, and I hope that all

parties in here will be a lot more

receptive to necessary changes.

The

honourable gentleman raises a really

important point and I can assure him

that the commission will meet under

the chairmanship of Mr Speaker this

afternoon and will be these matters

there.

I'm delighted to hear the

Leader of the House will extend

these to other forms of abuse. Will

that include those MPs who go on

rallies endorsing the lynching of

other MPs? It is an absolute

disgrace that senior MPs go about

their business getting violence

against female MPs?

My right

honourable friend raises an

incredibly important point again

about the vital significance about

what we do as MPs, and certainly

slogans about lynching other MPs is

incredibly despicable behaviour that

is occasionally encouraged, and I

think it is deeply regrettable and

we all need to look very carefully

at what sort of behaviour we endorse

in this House.

Sexual harassment is

a problem in Parliament, as it is

indeed in workplaces and schools

right across the country, and it is

often worst where there are big

discrepancies of power. I really

hope that the news reports of the

last few days act as a watershed

moment and help to capitalise the

change that we so clearly need, not

least in the outdated attitudes that

exist still in some quarters. I

welcome the cross-party agreement

that we need an independent

reporting mechanism for

investigating complaints, but will

the leader of the House agree that

if people are to have confidence in

using it, the process needs to be

very clearly set out, as indeed do

the outcomes need to be, because

repercussions in secret via the

usual channels will not cut it in

2017?

The honourable lady has been a

big champion for women over several

years and I applaud her for that.

She is absolutely right. What the

grievance procedure will need to do

is to be very clear, very well

communicated, and with very clearly

established and set out principles

about how the grievance procedure

escalates, with very clear so that

what results from the end of it, so

everybody who participate in it can

see for themselves.

Urgency of

course is very important in how we

deal with this issue, but

nevertheless will the Leader of the

House confirmed that this is not

going to be something that will be

dealt with simply by Has officials

and those working at the Palace of

Westminster? But the best practice

would be utilised, and that advice

will be sought from external

organisations as to how they deal

with this, because we need to get

this right first time round.

Well, I

think vital will be cross-party

agreement. I'm working closely with

your office, Mr Speaker, and of

course the House officials

themselves do have some expertise in

this area, but all ideas will be

welcomed, but bearing in mind as the

numbers of members have said this is

a very unusual workplace.

I would

obviously welcome what has been said

here today, and look forward to

working with you on the reference

group on this issue going forward.

As I walked in here, as I rushed

into data come to this statement, I

overheard two male colleagues

walking through the halls wittering

about a witch hunt that was going on

in Parliament, so I think that what

we need to do in this building is

not think of this as being a party

political thing but something that

has to absolutely happen, and we

don't just cheer when our own side

is the person getting attacked. We

cheer when everyone is bound to

write. I want to ask the Leader of

the House is you touch on a little

bit, and she didn't when she

outlined what she and the Government

felt needed to be done, what she

felt needed to happen the

perpetrators of this crime, because

the fact of the matter is good

referral lines, support for victims,

it is obviously something I support,

but nothing hurts a victim more than

watching a perpetrator getting away

with it.

Well, she is exactly right,

and I certainly welcome her desire

for a nonpartisan approach to

resolution of this. It affects all

sides of the House and we do need to

work together on it. In terms of

what happens to the perpetrators,

that is of course a matter for the

House the debate, but it will

include, you know, where they are

staff who are perpetrating, then the

normal contractual potential for

losing your job, will it as an MP,

then the possible withdrawal of the

whip, or sacking of ministers and so

on, all of these well-known events

that can happen from time to time

must be in scope and will be in

scope.

I very much welcomed your

inclusion in your about bullying and

other forms of harassment. Can I say

that also sometimes victims are not

empowered to speak up and make a

complaint? Can we also make sure

there can be potentially a form of a

reporting, because other people can

observe harassment and bullying

within an office place and feel that

they could alert someone's attention

to it?

Yes, I think if we can

establish a proper grievance

procedure then it should be

perfectly possible to report

observed behaviour and not just

personal experience.

Can I welcome

your statement, Mr Speaker, and the

statements made today? As others

have said this is nothing new. This

comes about because of a political

culture of preferment, where people

can't speak about what has happened

to them for fear of their career

being stifled. In order to change

that political culture, it requires

all of us to take very strong

political leadership, and I say this

to the political leaders on both

sides, and all sides of the House.

This means taking decisions against

colleagues and others, even when

that is inconvenient, even when that

is against their own allies or are

own supporters are their own side,

and that requires strong leadership.

Does she agree with me?

I absolutely

agree with the honourable lady.

I

also welcome the statements and

comments made today. I was speaking

to my own research or just earlier

this week and she herself

highlighted some of the experiences

that she has had in this place, and

as a new MPI definitely find that

shocking and unacceptable -- as a

new MP I get to define that. Can I

had the code of education, both for

staff themselves and also for us as

members? Many members are coming

here have not had the experience of

employing people before. We need to

be kept up-to-date with what is

happening in society, what does

constitute harassment? We may think

those are innocent phrases but they

are not perceived as such and our

staff also need to be empowered

completely to bring forward

complaints. Does she agree with me?

I think my honourable friend raises

a really important and thoughtful

point, which is that very often

members don't... Have not had it

speeds of employing staff before

coming to this place, they do

themselves need some guidance, and I

think that can be a useful

contribution as a result of this

experience. -- they have not had the

experience of employing staff

before.

A member of staff in this

House called me today she reported

being sexually assaulted to the

proper authorities earlier this

year, and they did nothing. She is

deeply disappointed and distrustful

and she tells me that mistrust is

endemic. How can I assure will now

be treated differently?

If her staff would like to talk to

me about it I will certainly take it

up personally.

I welcome my right

honourable friend's statement

sending a clear message that sexual

harassment is never acceptable. Who

would have thought as we celebrate

the centenary of women getting the

vote that we have to address in this

chamber the conduct and language

that intimidates and controls women

in particular. This is about the

abuse of power and the status of

women. I welcome the cross-party

agreement to stamp this out,

especially as we are all working in

a climate where women across the

House are being abused just for

being in public office. Perhaps we

can start by referring to the code

of conduct. I raised this with the

Minister last week in business

questions. With the privilege of

being elected comes a duty and that

doesn't involve sexist language and

behaviour because all of us elected

know the power that we hold.

My

honourable friend is absolutely

right. I deeply regret the horrible

experience she has had in recent

weeks for merely trying to raise her

own digust at sexual harassment that

was going on. -- disgust.

Parliament

must act but all political parties

must act too. Does the leader of the

House agree that every party should

introduce independent reporting so

that women have the confidence to

come forward, not just in

parliament, but in local councils

and our party activists base too?

I

think the honourable lady raises a

really interesting point which I

will certainly take away and think

about, but my perspective on this is

that we need independent review

because the problem with parties

marking their own homework is always

that in itself creates an underlying

lack of confidence on the part of

victims. So I think that independent

review, that third party

professional view is going to be

very important in resolving this.

The honourable lady the member for

east Dumbarton shire was right to

talk about confidence because there

needs to be confidence in the system

and that's why it needs to be an

independent body because justice

must not only be done, it must be

seen to be done. But may I also say

that although the honourable lady

talked about witch-hunts, we have to

be very careful to avoid them and

one of the advantages of there being

an independent body was that it will

avoid just that. There will have to

be proper substantiated allegations

to be made.

Yes, my honourable

friend is right. What we don't want

to see is false allegations made and

then becoming a fact just is made,

so the absolutely proper

investigation is essential to get to

the bottom of the allegations and

find out whether they're true or

not.

Thank you for your leadership,

Mr Speaker, on this issue. We need

to be clear that we are not just

talking about issues that are

criminal, we are also talking about

making sure a culture of sexual

violence, harassment and misogny and

not believing those who come forward

is not considered the norm. And to

do that means being clear about what

happens, not just to those who come

forward, but those who participate.

So I would like to hear from the

leader of the House a bit more

clarity, and following my

colleagues, about what measures

she's expecting political parties to

take to make sure that we don't just

keep employees and volunteers safe

from illegal activities, but we also

protect them from a constructive

dismissal case or is it simply that

we are going to expect the

electorate to pick up the slack?

I

think I have been perfectly clear.

Firstly, that the issue is around

those who are made to feel

uncomfortable. I am absolutely

setting the bar significantly below

criminal activity, if people are

made to feel uncomfortable, then

that is not correct. In terms of the

consequences for the perpetrators, I

think I have also been perfectly

clear in the case of staff they can

for fit their jobs, in the case of

Members of Parliament they could

have the whip withdrawn and they

could be fired from Ministerial

office.

If we don't call out bad

behaviour, irresponsible or criminal

behaviour, which we do weekly in our

constituency surgeries, then we are

all part of the problem. The right

honourable lady opposite raised this

question rightly, and uses her

gravitas to highlight the issue and

I had the pleasure of serving on

your diversity committee to look at

these issues and we have been making

great strides forward on making this

a positive workplace for all. Can I

ask the leader and the Prime

Minister to work with me and all

members from all parties to make

sure that we have a strong voice in

all the separate issues, whether it

is misogny, poor language or

criminal behaviour that we do

everything to give public confidence

in every single party.

My honourable

friend has been a great champion of

treating others with respect and I

would be personally delighted to

work with her on this.

When all

cases have been reported and not

actioned, which is not just in North

Wales, but others, will they be

reopened? Will there be the right of

anybody who's been sexually

assaulted to say no, I don't want

the issue to go to the police, I

want it treated in other ways, in

other words, will the victim control

what the action is? Will there be

compulsory training on implications

of the duty of care under the

equality act immediately brought in

for all MPs and where someone wishes

to have trade union representation

to assist them will that be allowed?

The honourable gentleman raises some

really important and very sensible

ideas and I will look very carefully

at all of those. I do again urge

anybody who's been made to feel

uncomfortable or who feels they've

been improperly treated to come

forward and those issues will be

taken up through the right channels

which until we have a proper

independent grievance policy and a

group of people able to take that

up, then the existing policies of

the employee helpline which can be

expanded and my offer that people

can come to me personally, will

absolutely be appropriate ways to

take things forward.

Can I gently

remind the House this issue isn't

just about sexual harassment and it

isn't just about women. The issue of

bullying in this House is systemic.

Earlier today I received a text from

someone when he described a problem

that he saw in this place and he

spoke of them as a current member.

He is utterly foul and I am sure

it's a pattern of behaviour on his

part but in this instance I don't

think it will be fair on the woman

in question to name him. Still, he

says, do the best you can to widen

this to bullying and treating your

staff like, I think he has put dirt,

but can I say - can I ask the leader

of the House to widen this to not

only include issues of bullying but

also historical allegations?

Well,

it is absolutely the intention that

this review looks at all issues of

misdemeanour and misconduct

including sexual harassment and

bullying and other forms of

uncomfortable behaviour that is

perpetrated on members of staff in

this place.

When I was a curate in

the Church of England 30 years ago

one of my close colleagues confided

in me he had been raped by a senior

member of the Church of England

clergy. My friend was understandably

terrified about telling anybody,

telling the police or anybody else

that this was the truth. In the end,

he felt suicidal, he didn't want

others to know what had happened to

him, understandably he was the

victim, not the perpetrator. Now I

make no criticism of my friend and

the senior cleric concerned had a

great deal of protection from the

establishment, including from

certain members in the Royal Family.

And he subsequently, thank God, went

to prison. The Church's instinct was

to protect itself as the

institution. Isn't that always the

danger? Isn't the one thing that we

must learn from all of this, that

the best way to protect the

institution is actually to protect

the victims? Put our own house in

order. Can I make one tiny

suggestion, which is that any time

an MP interviews somebody for a new

job, they have somebody from HR, an

HR professional sitting alongside

them in the interview?

Well, I think

the honourable gentleman raises a

really terrible case and absolutely

horrifying and he is right to point

out that the victim should not be

the one to suffer in the way that

his friend obviously did. I think

the point he raises is a very

important one, that we do need to

ensure that this is not the House

protecting it self, but that it is

parliament protecting all of those

who come here to work and try to

make their country a better place.

Can I congratulate the right

honourable lady, the member for

Camberwell and Peckham for asking

this and the leader of the House for

her response. Can I ask how many

calls have been made to the

confidential helpline up until now

and if we are to really get rid of

this unacceptable behaviour wouldn't

it a good place to start be to

contact those who have contacted the

confidential helpline to see how

their cases might be taken forward

now?

Well, I say to my honourable

friend that on the employee

assistance programme it is intended

as a safety net to complement the

existing pastoral care and internal

processes put in place by MPs

themselves and the main political

parties. In response to his specific

question about how many calls have

been made, I don't know but I can

find out and put that in the

library.

When I visit one of the

schools in my constituency as we

often do as MPs, I am required to

sign in, I am made away of the

safeguarding policies every time.

While I recognise that parliament

isn't exactly the same as a school,

I am concerned there are often

visitors brought on to the estate

often are here socialising late at

night who must also be held

responsible it too. Can I ask the

leader of the House how she will

ensure this is a safe place for all,

by all, all of the time?

The

honourable lady raises another

different but equally very important

point which is the safety and

protection of those who come on to

the estate. It's something that I am

actually looking at carefully and as

I mentioned earlier, I will be

meeting with Lord McFall tomorrow to

discuss exactly how we protect those

who come on to the estate in order

to socialise, often quite late at

night.

I came to this place after

some years working for the BBC, an

institution which in itself has had

its challenges in this area. With

that experience I want to endorse

what the leader of the House and you

yourself Mr Speaker have said about

the importance of this institution

having a robust procedure. It must

not be left to individual components

thereof, be that individual

employers or political parties. It

is this institution, parliament,

that has to have this robust

governance procedure. Can I say that

there are a few categories of people

that I think specifically this

process must be sufficiently fleet

of foot to be able to help. The

first is those members of staff who

work in our constituency offices who

do often feel isolated and

vulnerable. The second is students

and they are often students who come

here on work experience or to do

internships. I would like to suggest

that whenever a student, an intern,

someone on a workplacement begins,

there should be as part of a basic

induction process, a very simple

instruction as to this is where you

go, if at any time you feel

vulnerable. I think that's lacking

at the moment.

Yes, my honourable

friend is right. Some of us do have

clear guidelines for very often

quite young people coming to this

place for work experience and

something that we can all give to

those young people to give them

reassurance is an extremely good

idea.

I think across the House what

we recognise is that this is a fault

of undiluted power, when someone

holds your entire future in their

hands, it is very difficult to

refuse or to speak out. While it's

sexual abuse and sexual harassment

that has brought this to the

attention today, it is also misgny

dismissal and gender discrimination

and it isn't just here. Here needs

to start the change, but in the law,

in the NHS, in any hierarchical

system we need to see change.

Victoria

I think the honourable lady is right

and it can create a culture where

abuse is endemic throughout the

systems, so I would not say it is

only from the top but certainly that

is where it starts in real

leadership needs to be taken.

Those

of us who have been in this place

long enough to have seen the

expenses scandal will have seen how

that long drawn-out process, often

subject to apparent obfuscation by

this place, was deeply damaging not

only to the integrity of this

institution but every member of it

by implication despite how

innocently might have been, so does

the leader of the Has agree with me

that it is absolutely essential that

the tackle this problem it needs to

be swift, robust and totally

transparent? Because we send out a

message to the way the rest of

society happens and all of us,

however innocent, have a duty to

play in that.

My honourable friend

is exactly right, and it is

absolutely our intention that we

will make very swift progress on

this within days. He is right to

point out that cross-party there is

agreement that this needs to be

resolved, and I think if we all work

together we will be able to do that.

Thank you for your statement, Mr

Speaker, and the Leader of the House

for her very forthright statement.

The leader of the house said earlier

this was an issue that did not just

focus on Westminster but applied to

politics throughout the country. In

my own local authority very

recently, two female councillors

have been abused in a most sexually

derogatory manner online, initiated

by a fellow councillor. Could I ask

the Leader of the House to have

conversation with those communities

to ensure those robust policies and

procedures she is outlining for this

House apply equally to local

Government councillors and staff?

The honourable gentleman raises are

very important point and my

honourable friend would be happy to

meet with them and discuss this

specifically.

Many thanks, Mr

Speaker. I welcome the cross-party

approach that has been discussed. As

a doctor coming into the house, I

was quite concerned from the

constituency is to find that no

disclosure checks are mandatory for

staff in the constituency office,

although these checks are quite

rigorous in terms of those working

in Parliament. With the Leader of

the House agree it is important that

staff are kept safe right across the

board and also we have a duty to

protect constituents? -- would then

Leader of the House agree?

That is a

very interesting point the

honourable lady raises, and I will

certainly look into it.

I referred

to the House and my record at the

register of interests. Your

preferred to the fundamental

imbalance between the parliamentary

staff and our staff as members.

Parliamentary staff have one

employer, they are members of a

recognised trade union if they wish

to be, but there is a very active

and well organised trade union

representing member staff. I know

because it used to be branch

secretary of it, so could I ask you,

Mr Speaker, and the Leader of the

House, if you would be willing to

meet with that union in order to

discuss recognition, which is not

without precedent is?

Well, I can't

speak for you, Mr Speaker, but I

would certainly be very happy to

meet with them.

Similarly, I am very

happy to meet and I look forward to

hearing from the honourable lady.

This should be an opportunity for a

troika, a quartet or perhaps

something larger, I don't know, but

it is important and should happen

sooner rather than later.

Many

employers as well as having a

standard independent procedure, they

have a bullying and harassment

policy separately under a different

procedure, so can I ask the Leader

of the House if that has been

explored, a separate bullying and

harassment policy? And does she

agree with me that trade unions now,

if they have any members of staff

coming to them with complaints, that

they should be invited to make those

complaints to the Speaker and the

Leader of the House?

I am certainly

aware as a constituency MP myself

that some trade unions have done

excellent work in protecting their

members from bullying at work, and

that is vital role that they fulfil.

My inclination in terms of how we go

about resolving our own House issues

is that we should have two House

solution and it should be an

independent grievance procedure for

anybody can bring any allegations,

whether of bullying, intimidation,

sexually inappropriate behaviour and

so on, than having separate streams

of activity.

Can I ask the Leader of

the House if she will give some

consideration to providing a set of

this training for staff so they

might be better equipped to decide

for themselves what constitutes good

humoured hijinks and what

constitutes sexual harassment?

Yes,

the honourable lady raises are very

good point and I certainly would be

very supportive of that. They're

often our courses that are made

available, and individual members

can choose to send staff -- often

our courses. I myself have sent

staff on assertiveness training.

Equally, and other members with

this, the issue of training members

of Parliament on how to treat their

staff, and I think that equally has

merit and all of these things should

be up for discussion.

In adding the

support of members of this bench to

the cross-party focus there has been

this afternoon, could I urge caution

to the leader and perhaps ask for a

bit of clarity? There was a promise

earlier for a completely

confidential reporting mechanism and

can I assure that is solely focused

on a lack of reporting on

publication of the name of a victim,

bigger can't see how you could

proceed the full allegation through

to the accused without revealing the

identity of the victim?

Yes, I

understand the point of the

honourable gentleman is making and

what I was suggesting was that it

should be possible for the accuser

to remain anonymous at least in the

early stages, because all too often

people have been afraid of coming

forward for fear of their name being

all over the front pages of the

newspapers.

Reflecting on the

comments of my honourable friend

from Leicester West, which she also

take into account that if we make a

step forward here in Westminster, it

actually further perpetuates the gap

in terms of protection between

people who work in this place and

our wider political constituencies?

In other words the culture of our

political parties. While we have a

real duty of care to those

activists, and were actually

bullying and intimidation and other

forms of bad behaviour can often

spread very easily against a culture

where political parties seek to shut

down allegations rather than

bringing them into the light?

Yes,

the honourable gentleman is right to

raise this point, and it is

certainly something I would hope, if

we can show leadership in this place

we would then be able to tackle the

wider ramifications throughout the

country.

I, too, agree with much of

what has been said today, but

however I find it hard to believe

that other members were not aware of

allegations of the kind made in

recent days. The fact that things

like this have not been reported up

until now speaks to the Matt Chilton

image of this place but also of the

unwillingness of far too many men to

report such behaviour. Does the

leader agree with me that those men

who remain silent in some cases are

just as copper bowl of the

perpetrators in this place and

elsewhere and the need to come

forward to -- that they are just as

culpable as the perpetrators.

I do

off those who feel uncomfortable,

that they have been abused, bullied,

intimidated or harassed to come

forward, but what I don't think the

honourable gentleman is right to

suggest is that those victims are

somehow themselves guilty of

anything by failing to come forward.

Could the Leader of the House ensure

that the promised new procedures

take action on the behaviours of

racism, misogyny, homophobia and

bullying as well as sexual

harassment, as none of these have

any place in our democracy? My

honourable friend referred to local

government. Could we have items

issued so that other levels of

government also adopt similar

procedure is? We also still have

MEPs in the European Parliament,

because otherwise unless this action

is taken it will be politics as a

whole which comes into disrepute.

Yes, I can absolutely confirm that

all issues around homophobia,

racism, bullying, sexual harassment

and so on will be absolutely part of

the scope of the work to look at

creating an independent grievance

procedure, and she is exactly right,

that treating one another with

respect throughout our politics is

absolutely essential, and we will

see what more can be done to ensure

that is the case.

I very much

welcome your leadership on this very

important issue and indeed the

statements from honourable friend

from both sides of the house. Is

there Leader of the House away, to

the best of her knowledge, of any

allegations that would warrant

police investigation?

I'm not aware

of any specific allegations that

would warrant criminal

investigation, no.

With my teacher

hat on, I'd like to endorse what has

already been said about how young

inexperienced staffers can often not

know their rights, and to also

endorsed the idea of some kind of

induction, but this House should be

reading from the front. There is

something else we can also do, which

is to ensure that sex and

relationship education in schools is

finally enacted so that we can't

start to tackle this from the bottom

up as well. Go absolutely sure the

honourable lady's concern that we

need to set a good example --

I

absolutely share the honourable

lady's concern. That we need to set

a good example and do more to

protect children and young people.

On the specific subject of sex and

education, I agree with her up to a

point. I think it is absolutely

vital that the relationship

education is put up their own

alongside sex education and that the

two are taught hand-in-hand.

I'm

beginning to realise your attempts

to modernise this place, just how

great they are, the scale of the

challenge your face. Can I urge the

Leader of the House to work with the

Institute of personal development by

way of personal example to Philly

audit what procedures are in place

and to ensure that best practice is

introduced to help modernise and

professionalise this place?

I think

the honourable gentleman's queue is

probably shared by many across this

House in that it is quite difficult

to pin down exactly who is response

of what -- honourable gentleman's

view. That is why this very urgent

review is absolutely necessary and

we are determined to come out with a

coherent grievance procedure that

all members and staff, right across

both houses, can actually refer to.

The proposal is a positive step but

we also need to consider what

happens after that procedure has

been completed. Quite possibly the

complainant will still be employed

by the person they have made the

complaint against which could make

relationships very difficult at best

and at worst they will have

completely broken down. I know that

Leader of the House has said that in

certain circumstances the whip may

be removed, but actually that person

who made the complaint may still be

employed by that member. That put

someone in an impossible situation

and surely that cannot be right?

Well, I certainly share the

honourable gentleman's concern and

he will be aware that very often

members of staff to move around and

go and work for another Member of

Parliament, and clearly different

outcomes for different situations,

but what is very important is that

victims feel that they are heard,

understood, listened to, supported,

and then that their concerns are

acted upon.

Thank you, Mr Speaker,

for your statement today. Could I

just cautioned the Leader of the

House for focus on mediation?

Mediation as she is there is an

equality of power. Where there is a

perpetrator and survivor of sexual

abuse there is a clear inequality of

power. Did she look at this again?

Well, just to be clear, I'm not

talking about mediation, I'm talking

about an independent grievance

procedure were independent people

would be able to investigate a

particular situation, quite apart

from the members in this House. It

would absolutely not be the case

that you would find the victim

having to be mediated with the

person that they alleged perpetrator

the crime against them.

-- committed

the crime against them. I welcome

the Leader of the House's

constructive proposals to tackle

this very serious issue, but over

the weekend I read some very

worrying articles speaking about

issues in political parties, saying

that they held information about

sexual misconduct by their own MPs

but stayed quiet because of fear of

sabotaging their own career and

bringing the Government into

disrepute. Is the Leader of the

House aware of these reports, does

she believe them to be true, and if

so what is she going to do about it?

I am absolutely not aware of any

such wrongdoing as she suggests, and

I am absolutely confident that

anybody who had serious allegations

would be directed by the whip's

offers or by members of Parliament

to go directly to the police. -- the

whips office.

In further to my

honourable friend's question, can I

a little further? Just yesterday a

current Government minister appeared

in the media and said he was clear

that what went on in the whip's

offers stayed in the whip's offers.

Can she advise that House whether

she still considers this approach is

appropriate in light of these

allegations -- whip's office. Can

she also respond to the question of

whether the Prime Minister receives

our briefing every week from the

Chief Whip regarding spurious

behaviour in the House?

I think the

honourable lady should really

consider the logic of what she is

saying, if she really thinks the

Prime Minister would be sitting

there chatting with the Chief Whip

in the way she suggests. That is

quite clearly not true. I think it

is absolutely vital that we all take

this seriously, and with the proper

consideration of the matter, which

is the allegations against members

of Parliament by their staff.

Anybody who had prior knowledge of

those things would encourage those

individuals to go to the police, or

would provide them with the support

that they need. There is absolutely

no covering up going on.

The leader of the House has rightly

recognised that these situations

arise out of an imbalance of and

abuse of power. May I endorse the

question from my honourable friend

the member for York about completely

outlawing the use of mediation in

such circumstances, it would be

wholly inappropriate. Does she not

recognise that this goes to the

heart of the victims being believed

in making their allegation and that

it is absolutely important that

message is sent out loud and clear

as part of this exercise she's now

undertaking?

Well, I say again it's

important that there are independent

investigations of allegations, not

mediation and that we use every

effort to ensure that those who have

allegations against another

individual are properly listened to

and supported and that those

allegations are properly

investigated.

On the way to this

debate I overheard two members

joking about this issue asking in

humour whether they had fessed up to

their sexual harassment. As a man I

stand up to call that out, it is not

bants, it is unacceptable. I

understand that in response to some

journalist by members of this House

presenting testimony from victims

with evidence of sexual harassment

those members have responded by

instructing lawyers to gag the

stories those journalists are

pursuing. Can the leader of the

House ensure that members that use

this service, members of staff that

use this service will get access to

legal advice and what will she do to

ensure victims' voices aren't

silenced due to legal process?

Well,

I say again it's vital that we take

a grip of this issue, that we look

very quickly and I mean in a matter

of days, cross-party at what can be

done to establish a proper

independent grievance procedure that

all staff across both Houses have

access to so that their concerns can

be heard, properly investigated and

properly acted upon.

Thank you. I am

grateful to all colleagues who

participated in this important

exchange. Order. Statement, the

Minister of State for policing and

the fire service. Minister of State.

With your permission, Mr spook --

Speaker I would like to make a

statement to the House on the

publication of an independent review

of deaths and serious incidents in

police custody and this Government's

substantive response to the report

and its recommendations. In 2015 the

right honourable Theresa May met

with the relatives of those who had

died trajly in police custody. The

families' experience left her in no

doubt that there was significant

work to do. Not only to prevent

deaths in police custody, but also

where they do occur, to ensure that

the families are treated with

dignity and compassion. And have

meaningful involvement and support

in their very difficult journey to

find answers about what happened to

their loved ones. I know everyone in

this House will want to join me in

expressing our sympathy and sorrow

for all those families who have lost

loved ones who have died in police

custody. It is essential that deaths

and serious incidents in police

custody are reduced as far as

possible and when they do occur that

they are investigated thoroughly,

that agencies are held to account,

that lessons are learned, and

bereaved families are provided with

the support that they need. I know

that the House will want to join me

in acknowledging the incredible

efforts of our country's police

officers and forces, the vast

majority of which do their jobs

well, to give substance to the

principle of policing by consent.

However, when things do go wrong

policing by consent can only have

meaning where swift action is taken

to find the truth, to expose

institutional failings and tackle

any conduct issues where these are

found. It is for these reasons that

in 2015 the Government commissioned

the independent review of deaths and

serious incidents in police custody

and appointed an independent chair.

Earlier this year the review was

concluded and today having carefully

considered the review and the

recommendations Government is

publishing both her report and the

Government's response. The report is

considerable in scope and makes 110

recommendations for improvement

covering every aspect of the

procedures and processes surrounding

deaths and serious incidents in

police custody. It is, I think,

particularly valuable in affording a

central role to the perspective of

bereaved families. And demonstrating

beyond doubt that their experiences

offer a rich source of learning for

the police, investigateory bodies,

coroners and many others with a role

to play when these tragic incidents

occur. In terms of the Government

response, I want to stress to the

House that the issues identified in

the report point to the need for

reform in a number of areas where we

have begun or set in motion work

today. But the report also

highlights complex issues for which

there are no easy answers at this

time. The Government response which

I outline today is to be seen as the