Image-based Abuse
(Sheffield Central) (Lab)
What recent assessment he has made of the effectiveness of
legislation in protecting victims from image-based abuse.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice ()
We recognise and share public concern over abuses of new
technology to harm victims, and we are taking action. Today, new
provisions on threatening to share private sexual images come
into force, and we are going further. We have asked the Law
Commission to review the law on image abuse to ensure that
victims are properly protected. The commission will publish
recommendations in spring next year, and we will consider them
very carefully.
[V]
My constituent Helen Mort had the appalling experience of finding
out that someone unknown to her had taken ordinary images from
her social media and superimposed them on violent and extreme
pornography. These were not intimate images, but they were used
to create deepfakes. When she went to the police, she was told
that there was no crime to investigate as the original images
were not private. The Law Commission’s review, to which the
Minister refers, proposes extending the criminalisation of
sharing intimate images to include deepfakes. Will the Minister
ensure that the Government respond positively and quickly to
those proposals so that people like Helen are protected in the
future?
I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising that
harrowing case. He is absolutely right to do so. We recognise
that the law needs to keep pace with those who would use
technology to perpetrate dreadful abuse. We have asked the Law
Commission to act, as he indicated. It is doing so at pace, and
we will be looking very carefully with a view to extending the
law where it is appropriate to do so.
Court Capacity
(Pontypridd) (Lab)
What steps his Department is taking to increase court capacity.
(Stockport) (Lab)
What steps his Department is taking to increase court capacity.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice ()
The pandemic has affected courts, like it has affected so many
other areas of life. The Government have responded energetically
and comprehensively, for example by opening 60 new Nightingale
courtrooms, hiring an extra 1,600 Her Majesty’s Courts and
Tribunals Service staff, injecting hundreds of millions of pounds
extra into the system, and making sure that around 20,000
hearings a week can now be conducted online. These measures are
designed to enable court recovery, and I can assure the House
that these efforts will continue.
The Minister’s total failure to improve court waiting times is
having a very real-world cost, no more so than for my
100-year-old constituent whose fraud case against a former carer
amounts to more than a quarter of a million pounds. Despite
initiating the case more than four years ago, that elderly woman
is still waiting and is unlikely to see justice served in her
lifetime. The Minister knows about that case, as I have written
to his Department on multiple occasions, but still the delays
persist. What exactly does he have to say to my constituent,
along with the thousands of others like her who are once again
being left behind by this Government and denied justice?
Listing of individual cases is a judicial function, and there are
sometimes legal reasons why cases get put off. I must say that in
Wales, actually, the court system is performing particularly well
at the moment. The hon. Lady talks about delays. Of course,
during the pandemic some delays have built up, but in the
magistrates court, for example, about half of the backlog that
accumulated due to covid, which peaked in about August last year,
has already been removed. The outstanding case load in the
magistrates court is currently dropping at a rate of around 2,000
a week. I also gently point out that the outstanding case load
prior to the pandemic in the Crown court, at 39,000 cases, was
considerably lower than the 47,000 cases in 2010.
The Crown court backlog has reached a new record high of nearly
60,000 cases. That is the result of a decade of Conservative cuts
and court closures. Will the Government commit to continuing
Nightingale courts until the backlog is cleared?
We are continuing Nightingale courtrooms. We are also saying to
the judiciary, critically, that there will be no constraint on
Crown court sitting days this current financial year; the
judiciary can list as many cases as they are physically able to.
On Crown court numbers, clearly, jury trials and pandemics do not
mix very well, but thanks to the steps taken, we have seen the
corner turned just recently—in the last few weeks. Crown court
case numbers are beginning to edge down for the first time, and
we are committed to making sure that continues.
(Bromley and Chislehurst) (Con) [V]
I welcome the Minister’s last point, because the Director of
Public Prosecutions told the Justice Committee two weeks ago that
case loads in the Crown court are currently at 95% of physical
capacity, making allowance for the Nightingale courts, but that
the Crown Prosecution Service’s total case load has increased by
some 53% since February 2020. Does the Minister agree that that
must mean that, to keep the backlog reducing in a sustainable
fashion, we must have long-term, continued investment in
increased court capacity, but also in judges and recorders, in
court staff available to hear and try cases, and in CPS staff to
ensure that they are ready for trial on time?
The Chair of the Justice Committee is, as always, right in his
analysis. We need to ensure that the capacity exists and, for the
reason he mentioned, 1,600 extra staff have already been hired
for Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service. He also mentioned
Crown Prosecution Service capacity. I think its budget recently
went up by about £80 million to enable 400 additional prosecutors
to be hired.
In relation to judicial capacity, we will shortly bring forward
measures to increase the mandatory retirement age for magistrates
and judges from 70 to 75, which we hope will retain the most
experienced judges who will be able to sit and hear these cases.
In relation to physical courtroom capacity, we have clearly
invested enormously in technology to enable remote hearings and,
as I mentioned, about 20,000 a week are taking place. In addition
to that, we have the 60 Nightingale courtrooms. When social
distancing is relaxed—nothing has been confirmed, but we have a
reasonable expectation that it will be in the near future—a
reduction in those requirements will enable more courtrooms to be
used safely than is the case today, which will also greatly
assist court recovery.
(Stockton North) (Lab)
The Minister has been keen to talk up the Government’s efforts to
get court waiting lists down, but it is vital that efficiency
does not come at the expense of effective and proper justice. I
hope he is aware of the controversy surrounding the use of the
single justice procedure in relation to the thousands of people
prosecuted for coronavirus-related offences and the fact that
hundreds—the bulk in their absence—may have been wrongly charged
and convicted. Indeed, 37 people have been unlawfully prosecuted
under schedule 22 of the Coronavirus Act 2020, which has never
been activated in England. When that problem was highlighted by
Big Brother Watch and The Guardian newspaper, the Ministry of
Justice said that
“defendants can…have their conviction voided and reheard if
necessary.”
Surely the Minister agrees that such incompetence adds to the
burden of the courts, is more expensive, weakens justice and may
well be unlawful. What is he going to do about it?
First, it is important to make clear that prosecution decisions
are taken by the independent Crown Prosecution Service, not by
the courts system. Secondly, when it comes to maintaining
standards of justice, I think the right hon. Member for Tottenham
(Mr Lammy), the shadow Secretary of State, floated the idea of
having smaller juries earlier in the pandemic. Of course, we have
maintained juries at 12. However, where unusual measures such as
remote hearings have had to be taken throughout the pandemic, the
Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice has ensured
that justice standards have been maintained. Judges have always
had the proper discretion to direct proceedings in their
courtrooms so that justice is not only properly done but fairly
done.
Human Rights Act 1998 (Amendment)
(Livingston) (SNP)
What plans he has to bring forward legislative proposals to amend
the Human Rights Act 1998.
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice ()
The Government have established the independent Human Rights Act
review to examine the framework of the Act, how it is operating
in practice and whether any change is required. The review is
considering the approach taken by our domestic courts to the
jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and whether
the HRA currently strikes the correct balance between the roles
of the courts, the Government and this place. The report, due
this summer, will be published, as will the Government’s
response.
[V]
Given this Tory Government’s track record of either not
consulting or railroading changes without consultation, will the
Secretary of State confirm that any proposals to amend the Human
Rights Act will be subject to a full public consultation lasting
at least three months?
The hon. Lady will be glad to know that a wholly independent
review reflecting opinion from right across the United Kingdom
and beyond was set up and will report in due course. Then, no
doubt, there will be a consultation on those issues ahead of any
legislative change that the Government might introduce to this
place.
(Tottenham) (Lab)
This week, the UN’s special rapporteur for human rights said that
the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, the Covert Human
Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Act 2021 and the judicial
review Bill will all make human rights violations more likely to
occur. The Lord Chancellor will be aware of his special
responsibilities to defend human rights both in his Department
and across Government. As his two-year anniversary as Lord
Chancellor arrives next month—I congratulate him on that—will he
consider starting to do that part of his job? How will he respond
to the UN special rapporteur’s assessment?
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his kind words.
With respect to the special rapporteur, I would strongly argue
that in everything we do and say in this place and in Government,
the necessary checks and balances are carried out to ensure that
the human rights that he and I believe in are preserved. I can
think of no better example than the Bill currently before the
House with regard to the duties that the police will have on the
need to balance freedom of expression and the rights of other
people. That is a balancing exercise at all times, and I will
discharge my duties in the way that I believe I have for the past
two years.
Violence Against Women and Girls
(Broxtowe) (Con)
What steps his Department is taking to tackle violence against
women and girls.
(Vauxhall)
(Lab/Co-op)
What steps his Department is taking to improve support in the
justice system for the victims of violence against women and
girls.
The Minister for Crime and Policing ()
We are investing in vital victim support services to the tune of
more than £150 million this year. The forthcoming victims Bill
will enshrine victims’ rights in law and explore the provision of
domestic abuse and sexual violence support. We are also working
with the Home Secretary to develop new violence against women and
girls and domestic abuse strategies to help to drive a step
change in response to these crimes.
[V]
During this pandemic, we have seen an unprecedented rise in
domestic abuse cases in the UK. In my constituency, the Broxtowe
Women’s Project has worked tirelessly to support many victims of
domestic violence. Will the Minister outline what the Government
are doing to ensure that they are tackling domestic abuse? Will
he also set out their plans to provide long-term support, both to
those who are directly affected and to their children, who often
do not receive the support they need?
I am extremely grateful to my hon. Friend for bringing that
organisation to prominence; I am grateful to it for the valuable
work that no doubt it has done, alongside others, during these
dreadful past 16 months or so. For our part, we have boosted
funding for specialist services by £51 million to support victims
through the covid-19 pandemic and beyond. That included £20.7
million for local community-based sexual violence and domestic
abuse services and a £27 million investment over two years to
recruit more independent sexual and domestic violence advisers.
The landmark Domestic Abuse Act 2021 contains new measures to
protect victims and will be followed by new violence against
women and girls and domestic abuse strategies, while the victims
Bill will further transform victims’ experience. I hope that that
will have an impact in Broxtowe, along with the rest of the
country.
[V]
Mr Speaker,
“Domestic abuse victims have to be taken seriously and listened
to”.
That is a direct quote from a letter to me from a constituent who
suffered physical, emotional and financial abuse at the hands of
her now ex-partner. She came to my surgery not to talk about him,
but for help with dealing with the police, who she says
mishandled her case and have not taken her seriously. Instead of
believing that the red marks on her neck were from an attempted
strangulation, they responded that the marks were too thin and
did not look serious enough. They also did not follow up on the
spy camera in her home.
Victims of domestic violence and abuse have told me that the
burden of proof is on them. Can the Minister tell me what steps
he is taking to bring about a culture change in the police so
that victims of domestic violence are believed from the outset?
Obviously, I am very alarmed to hear about that incident. I hope
that the hon. Lady will advise her constituent, if she is
unhappy, to pursue a complaint about her treatment through the
provisions available to her, both through the Metropolitan police
and through the Independent Office for Police Conduct. As part of
our work over the next few months towards a new violence against
women and girls strategy, we will be engaging the police to
ensure that, as the hon. Lady says, every victim who comes
forward to the police and makes allegations of such a serious
nature is taken into account.
I have to say that, while I am sorry to hear about that
experience, I have witnessed some very good and important work by
the police, not least the Metropolitan Police Service. I recently
visited its predatory offenders unit, which specifically targets
those who commit domestic violence and abuse where the victim is
too afraid to pursue a prosecution, and looks for other ways to
apprehend the perpetrator and put them behind bars.
Mr Speaker
I call shadow Minister .
(Cardiff North) (Lab)
Henriett Szucs and Jan Mustafa were brutally murdered, and their
bodies were found in the freezer of a known violent sex offender.
Their deaths were avoidable, had it not been for a catalogue of
failures within the justice system—failures that allowed this man
the freedom to repeatedly commit horrifying crimes—and the
collapse in victim safeguarding. Two women each week are murdered
by a current or former partner, and apologies simply are not
enough. I do not see the necessary action being taken to prevent
the next Henriett or Jan. Labour has a ready-to-go plan,
including a review of domestic violence and homicides; new
progress indicators, as we have in Wales; more sustainable
funding; and better access to specialist support services. The
Minister has the power to stop violence against women being an
afterthought in the justice system, so will he work with us to
achieve it?
I obviously reject the assertion that violence against women—or,
indeed, anybody—is an afterthought for this Government. I do not
think anybody could look at what we have done over the past two
years and think that we have done anything other than throw our
entire weight behind the fight against violence. Specifically,
the hon. Lady will have noted that one of the five key priorities
set by the National Policing Board for the whole of the criminal
justice system, including the police, has been the suppression
and reduction of murder, a third of which are domestic. She will
be interested to know that I am now entering the second round of
homicide murder roundtables with police forces across the country
and looking at their murder prevention strategies to ensure that
they get ahead of exactly the kind of heinous crime that she
points to. We know that the perpetrators of murder in this
country have, on average, seven previous offences. That means
that we should be able, as she rightly says, to identify them
before they commit that catastrophic and appalling act, and that
is exactly what we are trying to do.
Domestic Violence Victims
(Harlow) (Con)
What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on
supporting victims of domestic violence.
The Minister for Crime and Policing ()
We are working across Government to transform the response to the
abhorrent crime of domestic violence. We passed our landmark
Domestic Abuse Act 2021 in April, to be followed by the new
violence against women and girls and domestic abuse strategies.
The victims Bill will further transform victims’ experience. We
have also provided unprecedented funding to support the sector.
My constituent, a courageous woman, Ms Charlotte Budd, is a
survivor of domestic abuse, but she suffered a great deal further
from her experience in the family court system. Ms Budd has
criticised the pro-contact nature of the family court, arguing
that decisions have resulted in unsafe child arrangements. I
would be extremely grateful if my hon. Friend could set out what
steps the Department is taking to ensure that the presumption of
contact issue does not have damaging consequences for victims of
domestic abuse like Ms Charlotte Budd. Will one of the Ministers
in the Department meet me and my constituent, Ms Budd, to discuss
these issues further?
I am extremely grateful to my right hon. Friend for raising this
case, and I am very sorry to hear this distressing story. He is
quite right to say that the presumption of parental contact has
been a cause of concern to many, on the basis that it might
expose parents and children to greater risk, and we are reviewing
this provision at the moment. I would be more than happy to meet
him to discuss this case—and, indeed, the review—further in the
hope that we can move to an improved situation.
Pet Theft
(Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)
What steps his Department is taking to tackle pet theft.
(Rother
Valley) (Con)
What steps his Department is taking to tackle pet theft.
(Stoke-on-Trent North) (Con)
What steps his Department is taking to tackle pet theft.
(Wolverhampton North East) (Con)
What steps his Department is taking to tackle pet theft.
(Bolsover)
(Con)
What steps his Department is taking to tackle pet theft.
(Stockton South) (Con)
What steps his Department is taking to tackle pet theft.
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice ()
The Government recognise the deep distress that the theft of a
much-loved pet can cause, and I have met the Home Secretary and
the Environment Secretary to create a taskforce to investigate
the problem end to end. That work is under way and it is
gathering evidence to understand the factors that may be
contributing to any rise in pet theft and to recommend measures
to tackle the problem. It will report to Ministers on potential
solutions by the summer.
I am grateful for that response. Mandatory microchipping has been
a welcome step forward, and I understand that the law is now
consistent across all parts of the United Kingdom. What steps
have been taken to improve the microchipping process so that
owners can know where microchips are being run, when and by whom?
My hon. Friend will know that our manifesto pledge is to extend
microchipping to cats as well. With regard to dogs, over 90% of
them in England are now microchipped. This year, the Department
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is carrying out a
post-implementation review of the regulations that introduced
microchipping in 2015, to see how the various databases can
operate in a more co-ordinated way, and it will come forward with
proposals later in the year.
Pet theft is the most scurrilous crime, and residents have spoken
to me about the loss they have felt when their dog or cat has
been stolen from them. Does the Minister agree that each local
force should have a dedicated dog theft lead? Will he join my
calls for the police and crime commissioner to have a dog theft
lead for South Yorkshire police, like the one for the
Nottinghamshire constabulary?
I welcome my hon. Friend’s commitment to this campaign. I am
pleased to hear about his energetic efforts in this sphere and I
wish him well. Decisions on priorities are, of course, a matter
for individual forces, but I am sure he will want to work with
his local force to achieve the laudable aims that his campaign
represents.
Pet theft is a shameless and disgusting act that harms families
across our country. Scumbag Malachy Doherty of Tunstall was
recently sentenced to 27 weeks in prison for stealing Labradors
Denzel and Welly. Twenty-seven weeks does not seem long enough to
me, so does my right hon. and learned Friend agree with the
people of Stoke-on-Trent North, Kidsgrove and Talke that, as part
of the pet theft taskforce, firmer punishments and vets checking
microchips at the first visit will be ways to help prevent the
heartache felt by many victims’ families?
My hon. Friend always speaks with vigour on behalf of his
constituents, and I wholeheartedly agree with his revulsion at
this appalling type of crime. We share his deep concern, which is
why the sort of ideas and proposals he outlined are very much at
the forefront of Government thinking.
I thank the Secretary of State for speaking to me recently about
pet theft. In the recent local election campaign in
Wolverhampton, I spoke to several constituents who are now too
nervous to go out to walk their dogs, especially in the evening
time. Does he recognise that, for their wellbeing, and for that
of their dogs, this is an urgent matter? Can he reassure me that
as soon as the taskforce reports the Government will take action
on pet theft reform?
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for her deep commitment to this
issue. She is so right to highlight the wellbeing and mental
health effects of the loss of a much-loved pet on her local
residents in Wolverhampton and more widely. That is precisely why
we took action to set up the taskforce, and we will indeed be
reporting as soon as possible to address the concerns of her
constituents.
Pet theft can be absolutely heartbreaking for families. I have
spoken to some of the families in my constituency who have gone
through this process and they warmly welcome the establishment of
the pet theft taskforce. Can my right hon. and learned Friend
outline what kind of solutions the taskforce is looking at?
My hon. Friend is right to reflect the views of his constituents
in Bolsover and the wider community. We are looking at not just
the consequences of pet theft, but ways in which the black market
in the trade in animals can be dealt with. Lots of ideas and
initiatives merit serious consideration as to how we can prevent
the incentives for this sort of despicable crime from occurring
in the first place. That is the work that is being carried out
now.
It is clear today that pet theft is having a huge impact on so
many families across the country. Indeed, if my mam had the
choice between me and her beloved, slightly obese Bichon, Archie,
it would be a close call and I would not fancy my odds. Pet theft
is on the rise. The loss of a furry family member is having an
impact on so many families. Will my right hon. and learned Friend
confirm not if and how, but when we will update the law to tackle
this terrible crime?
I am glad that my hon. Friend declared his interest, as is
appropriate. Many other Members of this House will be dog owners.
I am a cat owner, so I declare that interest. Clearly, behind
that, there is a very important point about the ways in which we
can help to prevent the spread of this crime. As the Prime
Minister said, this is often the underbelly of more organised and
serious criminality, where profit is being made on the backs of
the misery of not just the pets themselves, but their owners, who
suffer great distress as a result of the theft.
International Treaties on Human Rights: Obligations
(Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (SNP)
What steps he has taken to ensure the UK upholds its legal
obligations under international treaties on human rights.
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice ()
The United Kingdom has strong human rights protections within a
comprehensive and well-established constitutional and legal
system, and a long-standing tradition of ensuring that our rights
and liberties are protected domestically and of fulfilling our
international human rights obligations. We have put in place a
combination of policies and legislation to give effect to the
international human rights treaties that we have ratified. We
have a strong record before the various UN treaty-monitoring
bodies and fully participate in the relevant reporting processes.
By contrast with what the Secretary of State just said, the Joint
Committee on Human Rights recently published a report that
concludes that his Department’s Police, Crime, Sentencing and
Courts Bill will restrict peaceful protest
“in a way that we believe is inconsistent with our rights.”
The report also singles out the provisions on noisy protests as
“neither necessary nor proportionate”.
With findings like those, will the Secretary of State reconsider
his assertion that the Bill is compliant with the European
convention on human rights?
I am happy to repeat the declaration that I made on the face of
the Bill: its provisions are indeed compatible with the
convention. As a former member of the Joint Committee, I well
appreciate its work, but with respect, I wholly disagree with the
analysis that it has produced. The balance between freedom of
expression and other fundamental rights and the need to maintain
order and protect the rights of other citizens going about their
lawful business is properly struck in the Bill, which I commend
strongly to the House.
(Glasgow North East) (SNP) [V]
The Secretary of State recently dismissed the relevance of
international treaties, so it is interesting that today he is
using what he says is compliance with the ECHR to convince us
that his Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill is not, as the
Joint Committee said, “inconsistent with our rights.” How
relevant, then, is the opinion of the UN special rapporteur on
human rights, who said last week that the Bill runs “counter to
the” human rights “direction” that the UK
“need to be going in”?
Is the Secretary of State not just a little bit embarrassed about
that?
Just as the rapporteur is entitled to express, in clear and
independent terms, their view, so are we entitled to disagree
with it, and we do so very strongly in this instance.
So the Secretary of State does not respect international treaties
and is not listening to Parliament’s Joint Committee on Human
Rights; let us see whether he has a little more respect for the
UK’s Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities. Will he join in the
condemnation of the hon. Member for Ashfield (), who branded Travellers as thieves? What does he
say to Travellers who described the Bill as
“the single biggest threat to”
their
“traditional way of life”
and said that it may “entirely eradicate nomadic life”. Does the
Secretary of State want to eradicate their way of life?
I have not seen what was reported to have been said by my hon.
Friend the Member for Ashfield (). I simply say that in everything that we seek to do
we uphold the principles of equality, inclusion and diversity in
our society, but it is also right to remember that the interests
of one group will sometimes conflict with the interests of
another. It is important for us to maintain the balance between
the rights of, in that instance, local residents and the rights
of the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller community. It is all about
balance, which is what this Government constantly seek to strike
through their legislation.
Outcomes for Rape Victims
(Sevenoaks)
(Con)
What steps his Department is taking to improve outcomes for rape
victims.
The Minister for Crime and Policing ()
We are taking steps to ensure that we tackle this horrific crime
and restore confidence in the criminal justice system, as
outlined in the rape review that was published 10 days ago. We
will return the volume of rape cases going through the courts to
at least 2016 levels by the end of this Parliament and are taking
steps to improve the quality of investigations and reduce the
time taken for victims to be given their phone back during the
course of investigation. Furthermore, we are going to improve the
culture of joint working among police and prosecutors and hold
each part of the system to account through performance
scorecards.
(Lewisham West and Penge) (Lab)
The Crown court backlog currently stands at a record high of
almost 60,000 cases, and figures show that there has been a 67%
rise in the number of sexual offences cases awaiting trial. In
the Secretary of State’s own words, rape victims have been
“failed” by this Government. The rape review accepted that court
delays have contributed to the plummeting number of rape
prosecutions. Rape victims deserve a criminal justice system that
works for them and not against them, so why did the Government
vote against Labour’s amendments to the Police, Crime, Sentencing
and Courts Bill that called for the fast-tracking of rape cases
to be rolled out across England and Wales?
The hon. Lady is quite right that delay in the criminal justice
system, both from report to charge and then from charge to court,
has a significant impact on victims and is a driver of victim
attrition and cases therefore not proceeding. We are very focused
on compressing each of the various parts of the criminal justice
system so that they work efficiently and speedily, in line with
the need to get quality cases into court that will hopefully
secure convictions. While we have not supported the measures that
she put forward for the Bill, she will in time be able to see the
performance and the timeliness of various parts of the criminal
justice system through the publication of comprehensive
scorecards, which will allow us to judge, over time, first,
whether the number of cases in court rise, which I believe they
will quite significantly, but, secondly, whether more measures
are needed to be taken to drive further progress.
Rehabilitation of Offenders
(Harrow East)
(Con)
What steps his Department is taking to rehabilitate offenders.
(Wrexham) (Con)
What steps his Department is taking to rehabilitate offenders.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice ()
We must rehabilitate offenders by focusing relentlessly on the
factors that we know drive reoffending. That is why we are
working across Government to support people into a job, stable
accommodation and treatment for substance misuse. We have
recently announced a £200 million investment in third-sector
providers that deliver specialist rehabilitation services to
address those core priorities.
[V]
I thank my hon. Friend for his answer thus far. What further
measures does he intend to introduce to ensure that prison
governors enable those people leaving prison to be properly
trained and briefed on how they can get not only housing, but job
opportunities and benefits if they qualify for them, so that when
they leave prison they are not tempted to go back to their old
haunts and, indeed, to reoffend.
My hon. Friend speaks with great authority on this matter. This
House will recall well the excellent work that he did in respect
of the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017. He is absolutely right.
We are investing more than £20 million in a landmark new
accommodation service, providing up to 12 weeks of accommodation
for prison leavers who would otherwise be homeless. That will
start later this summer in five of our probation regions in
England, but we want to go further. We want to introduce housing
specialists in 20 prisons to strengthen partnerships with key
stakeholders such as those of local councils and housing
providers and to improve the expertise in prisons. We also want
prison work coaches, so that not only is the accommodation
sorted, but getting into a job is as well. Why is that important?
It is because those who leave with a job reduce their chances of
reoffending by 9%, changing lives in the process.
[V]
HMP Berwyn is one of the largest and newest prisons in Britain
and has been chosen as a pilot site for the Ministry of Justice’s
employment advisory board scheme. This scheme will bring together
business leaders, prison coaches, statutory services and the MP
in order to secure employment for offenders on release. I thank
the Minister for backing Berwyn and invite him to Wrexham to see
the businesses that are putting their faith in the justice system
and to sample one of Berwyn’s award-winning custodial pies.
I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for her question, but I am
even more grateful to her for being such a champion of HMP Berwyn
and, indeed, of this important initiative. She is absolutely
right: getting more prison leavers into jobs is key to cutting
crime. As I have indicated before, it reduces the chance of
reoffending by 9%. Of course, I would be delighted to visit her
in Wrexham to see the great work of the employment advisory
board. I congratulate her and all those she is working with on
their fantastic work at Berwyn in the Custodial Pie Corporation,
upskilling men in the hospitality industry.
Government and the Courts
(Ochil and South Perthshire) (SNP)
What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on
plans to review the relationship between Government and the
courts.
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice ()
Forgive me, Mr Speaker, I was thinking about the pies at HMP
Berwyn.
Mr Speaker
Who ate all the pies?
Well, not me. I will leave that to others to answer.
Naturally, I do not disclose the details of private conversations
that I have with Cabinet colleagues, but I can say that the
Government are thinking very carefully indeed about how to make
sure the balance of our constitution is right. In addition to the
reviews of administrative law in the Human Rights Act 1998, I am
now considering the constitutional settlement that was left by
the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. I will say more about that in
due course and I will be open and consultative as that work is
carried out.
[V]
The Public Law Project requested a breakdown of Government
spending on judicial review, but it said that the information
received was “barely a fraction of what should have been
published. It is not detailed or clear enough to give any
meaningful insight as to how judicial review impacts Government
departments”.
Why are the Government so reluctant to publish everything
requested?
The hon. Gentleman has expressed the view of one contributor to
the consultation. I would argue on the contrary—that, indeed, we
are publishing everything, consistent with our wider public duty
and with our duty to maintain collective Cabinet responsibility.
The current consultation has been ongoing. We are due to publish
a response to that ahead of any potential legislation. That will
all be done. Of course, any proposals will have the fullest
scrutiny from him and other right hon. and hon. Members in due
course.
Domestic Abuse: Legal Advice
(Barnsley
East) (Lab)
What recent assessment he has made of the effect of legal advice
deserts on the ability of victims of domestic abuse to access
justice.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice ()
We are committed to ensuring that civil legal aid remains
accessible to those who need it, including, in particular,
victims of domestic abuse. The Legal Aid Agency keeps market
capacity under review to ensure adequate provision across England
and Wales. We are reviewing the legal aid means test, including
in relation to victims of domestic abuse. On 3 March, the
Chancellor announced a further £19 million package to tackle
domestic abuse, and we have made changes to the evidence
requirements to make it easier to access legal aid.
Too many victims of domestic abuse still end up in the family
court with no representation, as litigants in person. Does the
Minister agree that we should make legal aid available for all
victims of domestic abuse?
The hon. Lady is absolutely right that legal aid is a vital
pillar of support to many people, which is why we have taken
steps to ensure that the evidence requirements for those who want
access to legal aid have been relaxed. We have also gone further;
we have supported organisations such as RCJ Advice through its
Finding Legal Options for Women Survivors service, which is a
fantastic digital portal to assist people in the agony of that
moment—as they may be in their home circumstances—to receive the
kind of support that they require so that they are best placed to
get a non-molestation order or an occupation order. We are
determined to stand up for victims of domestic abuse.
Independent Human Rights Act Review
(Orkney
and Shetland) (LD)
What recent progress has been made on the independent Human
Rights Act review.
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice ()
Since January this year, the review has conducted a public call
for evidence, which has received more than 150 submissions, and
has engaged with a wide range of interested parties at roundtable
meetings and online public roadshow events. The
evidence-gathering period has now concluded. The panel is now
considering the evidence and will draft its report over the
summer. The report will then be published, as will the
Government’s response.
Mr Carmichael
What does the Secretary of State want to achieve with his review?
He will be aware that as long as we remain a party to the
European convention on human rights, the rights that are
available to citizens as a consequence cannot be altered. Any
changes to the Human Rights Act would just return us to the
situation that we had before the Act, when we could only enforce
the remedies for these rights by going to Strasbourg. Is that
what the Government want to achieve here?
I know that the right hon. Gentleman will read the review’s
findings with great care. I have been clear that this is not
about changing the fundamental rights themselves, as he has quite
rightly observed; it is about the way in which the domestic
courts implement and interpret those rights. It is about the
mechanism, if you like. It is now 20 years since the Act came
into force and I think it is right at this juncture to give it a
careful examination. That is what the independent review is all
about. As he would expect, it will be followed up by the fullest
consultation, in which I know he will play a vigorous part.
Sexual Assault Victims: Public Naming
(Slough) (Lab)
What steps he is taking to tackle public naming of victims of
sexual assault.
The Minister for Crime and Policing ()
It is an offence to publish any matter likely to identify a
person who has made an allegation of rape or other sexual
assault. The prohibition applies automatically from the moment
the offence is reported and has effect throughout the
complainant’s lifetime.
Mr Dhesi
The public naming of a rape victim who has bravely come forward
is devastating for the individual concerned, but under current
legislation perpetrators of this crime get no more than a mere
£200 fine. At a time when 44% of rape victims are actually
pulling out of the justice system before their day in court, does
the Minister agree that such lax laws can deter even more sexual
assault victims from coming forward? If so, why did his
Government vote down proposals that would have strengthened
prosecuting powers against such perpetrators?
Those proposals were not appropriate for support, but we are
having a think and will make an announcement shortly.
Medomsley Detention Centre
(Thirsk and Malton) (Con)
What steps his Department is taking to help ensure that
appropriate compensation is disbursed to Medomsley Detention
Centre victims.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice ()
I have every sympathy for the survivors and victims of Medomsley
detention centre, who suffered abhorrent abuse. The Ministry of
Justice has been working for several years to compensate properly
survivors and victims. Where necessary, claimants are able to
submit medical evidence to support allegations of abuse so that
damages can be appropriately assessed. That includes both
physical and psychological injury. The majority of claims for
compensation have now been settled under a settlement protocol.
I am grateful for that answer. The compensation scheme covers
physical, not sexual abuse. My constituent suffered terrible,
much more serious abuse. He was drugged and raped, which has had
a profound effect on his health for over 40 years—both his
physical and his mental health—and that of his family. Will my
hon. Friend agree to meet me, my constituent and the chair of the
all-party parliamentary group on Medomsley detention centre to
discuss a proper compensation settlement for my constituent?
I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for that question, and he
paints a truly harrowing picture. For the avoidance of doubt,
cases involving serious sexual harm and psychological injury can
be dealt with by the Government Legal Department, albeit outside
the standard compensation scheme. Because of their seriousness
and complexity, they are considered on a case-by-case basis and
awards made have been significant. We take great care to ensure
the level of compensation properly reflects the seriousness of
the abuse. It is of course always open to claimants to issue
proceedings in the courts outwith the scheme, should they see
fit. I would be happy to meet to discuss the protocols, but I
just say this: it is important that Ministers do not interfere in
specific cases when litigation is ongoing.
Topical Questions
(Putney) (Lab)
If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice ()
Over the weekend, we launched the unified probation service for
England and Wales. It was the culmination of huge amounts of
preparation over two years, and I am hugely grateful to probation
colleagues and frontline staff for making it happen. We have
invested £310 million in that time to recruit 1,000 extra
probation officers, with 1,500 more on the way, alongside making
more use of technology such as GPS and sobriety tags. We are
determined to ensure that the millions of hours of unpaid work
handed down to offenders every year are served more visibly,
keeping our towns, cities and our countryside clean. I have said
many times that every Department of Government should be a
criminal justice department, and the new probation service will
be at the heart of a more joined-up approach with police, health
services, local authorities and others to cut crime and keep the
public safe from harm.
On 17 June, I wrote to the Justice Secretary about probation
services, raising a deeply concerning whistleblower case in the
probation service. When my constituent first joined the service,
there were 10 members of staff in her team. At the end of 2020,
three members of staff had left and a further three were on
long-term sick leave, and the case load was overwhelming. Does
the Secretary of State accept that the 60% drop in staffing
levels presents an unacceptable risk to public safeguarding, the
welfare of probation service officers and the rehabilitation of
offenders?
I will make sure that the hon. Lady’s letter is brought to my
attention. She sent it just over a week ago. I will not comment
about the individual case, but it will of course be looked at
carefully. She will be encouraged to know that as a result of the
investment we are making, 1,000 more probation officers have been
recruited already. We are going for another 1,500, and that means
that, together with the changes to how case loads are managed,
probation officers will be supported and encouraged, and the sort
of issues that she raises I believe will start to diminish,
because that is my determination. I want to sing the praises of
an unsung public service.
(Kensington)
(Con)
I am very concerned by the number of constituents who have
approached me who have been the victims of online and telephone
economic crime. Can the Secretary of State update the House as to
what he is doing to tackle such crime?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice ()
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise this issue. The
Government’s response to the economic crime threat is set out in
our economic crime plan, which lists seven strategic priorities
for combating crime through a specially convened public-private
partnership. That includes a number of specific actions,
including focusing on high-harm fraud types through online
activity such as courier fraud, romance fraud and investment
fraud. We are considering whether further legislative changes
need to be brought in to provide law enforcement with the tools
it needs to combat these emerging threats.
(Tottenham) (Lab)
Both the Secretary of State and the Prime Minister have
apologised for the Government’s failure of rape victims resulting
in record low prosecution and conviction rates. In attempting to
atone for these mistakes it is vital that the Government are
honest with victims. Last week, in Prime Minister’s questions,
the Prime Minister claimed he was investing another £1 billion in
clearing the court backlogs, but in the spending review the
figure announced to address the backlogs is £275 million. I am
sure that the Prime Minister was not deliberately misleading the
House. Will the Secretary of State correct the record?
The right hon. Gentleman raises an issue that I think I can help
to clarify for him. With regard to the specific figure, that of
course relates to spending during this coming year. We spent
another equivalent sum in the previous year on court recovery.
Indeed, when you look at the figures that we were spending anyway
on new technology in our courts, and indeed the Crown Prosecution
Service expenditure as well, then the figure actually is the
correct one. He should realise that it is not just the Ministry
of Justice that is funding court recovery and the effects of
covid; the Attorney General’s Office and indeed the Home Office
as well have a responsibility with regard to victims. So I am
afraid that fox is well and truly shot.
Mr Lammy
I have to say that the Secretary of State’s verbosity serves him
well.
In March, the Lord Chancellor told the Justice Committee that he
had been “played for a fool” in relation to improvements at
Rainsbrook secure training centre. He was clear that
“this will not happen again. Otherwise, the consequences will be
extremely serious for those responsible.”
Yet this did happen again, and only a year and a half later have
children been moved out of harm’s way. As the saying goes, “Fool
me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.” Does the Lord
Chancellor feel like a fool, and what “extremely serious”
consequences will he deliver to ensure that this does not happen
again?
I am very glad that the right hon. Gentleman asks me that
question because I can reassure him that as soon as the
particular reports were received from the independent monitors I
took swift action to make sure that the safety and wellbeing of
children at Rainsbrook was preserved. That is why we ordered that
children in the unit were moved. Indeed, work is carrying on with
regard to the overall future of Rainsbrook. It would be wrong of
me to speculate while discussions with the provider remain
ongoing, but I can tell him this: I will do whatever it takes to
make sure that the children in our care are protected and that
all our institutions, including Rainsbrook, are run properly. I
can assure him that the providers have had the message loud and
clear from me and that there will be no second chances.
(Barnsley
East) (Lab)
My constituent Claire suffered 13 months of abuse at the hands of
her ex-husband, who continued to stalk her after the end of their
relationship. He was given a 12-month restraining order. Will the
Government strengthen sentences for stalking and commit to
greater support for victims?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice ()
I am grateful to the hon. Lady for raising that matter. It is an
extraordinary fact that 10 years ago stalking was not even an
offence, but it was made an offence in 2012. I, together with my
hon. Friend the Member for Gloucester (), had a campaign to double the maximum sentence so
there is a maximum sentence of 10 years imprisonment. But it is
not enough to have the punishment; we have to make sure that
these matters get before the courts as well, and that is why I am
grateful to the police and the courts for prioritising them.
Those who stalk should know that they will be punished properly.
(Stoke-on-Trent North) (Con)
I once again place on the record my thanks to the Lord Chancellor
for backing my private Member’s Bill which called for specific
protection and punishment for those who desecrate memorials and
graves to our glorious dead. The people of Stoke-on-Trent North,
Kidsgrove and Talke also want to know whether this change in the
law will protect the statue of Sir Winston Churchill in
Parliament Square, which may not be a war memorial but is an
important reminder to the public of our greatest Briton.
I thank my hon. Friend for raising an issue of genuine and
widespread public concern. He will note that the phraseology in
the Bill talks about memorials, which of course would include
memorials such as the one to Sir Winston Churchill. The important
point is that we can now move away from the court determining on
the mere cost of repair to criminal damage to look at the overall
cultural and emotional value of statues like that one, and
indeed, ordinary “unvisited tombs”, to quote George Eliot, of
people who have a great value to the local community and to their
loved ones.
(Liverpool, Riverside) (Lab)
The Merseyside and Vauxhall law centres in Liverpool, Riverside
are extremely concerned about how constituents access the legal
advice that they need in the light of the drastic impact of the
Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 cuts
on legal aid, court waiting times and availability of advice. How
does the Minister intend to ensure that the sector can provide
access to justice in a properly functioning legal system for
those facing problems with rent arrears, welfare benefits,
employment, immigration, crime and domestic violence in the wake
of the pandemic?
I thank the hon. Lady for paying tribute to law centres; she is
absolutely right to do that. They do an important job of ensuring
that individuals—sometimes vulnerable individuals—can get that
vital legal advice and access to justice that they need. That is
why, at the beginning of the pandemic, when the message came out
that they might face real threats to their viability, we stepped
in. The Law Centres Network asked for £3 million and we provided
that. It was distributed through the network to ensure that law
centres have the funds they need to continue their excellent
work.
(Kettering)
(Con)
The number of Albanian prisoners in jail has increased from 524
in 2015 to 1,469 in 2020 and they now represent the largest
single national group of foreign national offenders in custody.
Although it is very good news that those criminals have been
caught and sentenced, given that we have a compulsory prisoner
transfer agreement with Albania, which was signed in 2013, why
are those convicts not being sent back to Albania to serve out
their sentences in prison in their own country?
My hon. Friend is right to analyse the figures closely. It is
interesting to note that some of the assumptions that people make
about foreign nationals and where they are from are out of date.
My hon. Friend is right to highlight our agreement with Albania,
but operationally those issues are difficult because often the
individuals whom we have identified, prosecuted and properly
incarcerated will not be known to the authorities in the
receiving country and there are issues with identity. However, we
carry on with our joint work across Government to ensure that as
many of those foreign national offenders as possible are
repatriated as quickly as possible. I think the latest cumulative
figure over the past five years is about 5,000, but of course I
will correct the record if that proves to be incorrect.
(Hove)
(Lab)
It was good to see the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State
condemning the harassment of in recent days.
However, the irony seems to be lost that experienced
textbook antisocial behaviour of the kind that happens
increasingly up and down our country in every single community.
Will the Secretary of State explain why antisocial behaviour has
been rising for five years, yet use of antisocial behaviour
orders and measures has fallen? When he introduces a victims
Bill, will it include measures to give victim status to people
who suffer from antisocial behaviour?
May I put on record my condemnation of the appalling incident
involving Professor Whitty in the last few days? With regard to
the way in which antisocial behaviour is policed, there have been
welcome initiatives and, indeed, changes to the law by Government
on preventive measures, particularly for young people and
children. Our youth offending teams and other diversionary teams
have done a lot to ensure that those issues do not end up before
a court, when the damage is already done. I take the strong view
that the distinction between crime and antisocial behaviour is
artificial. Of course, I will look constructively at anything
that we can incorporate in the forthcoming victims consultation
and, indeed, the Bill, which, I assure the hon. Gentleman, will
come.
(Bury
South) (Con)
Death by dangerous driving is not just heartbreaking for the
families left behind, but has a huge impact on local communities.
I am thinking in particular of Radcliffe New Road in my
constituency. Will my right hon. and learned Friend highlight
what work he is undertaking so that those who cause death by
reckless and dangerous driving receive tougher sentences to
reflect the serious nature of their crime?
My hon. Friend is right to raise on behalf of his constituents in
Bury the real damage that can be caused to the community by
careless and dangerous driving.
Through the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, we will
increase the maximum penalties for causing death by careless
driving while under the influence of drink and drugs, and for
causing death by dangerous driving, from 14 years to life
imprisonment. There will also be a new offence of causing serious
injury by careless driving, to close a gap in the law.
(Bosworth) (Con)
If reports are to be believed, my right hon. and learned Friend
has used the reconsideration mechanism to re-refer the double
murderer and child rapist Colin Pitchfork to the Parole Board.
Can he confirm that is true? If it is, I thank him for listening
to me, my hon. Friend the Member for South Leicestershire
() and the people of Leicestershire, who still feel that
crime vehemently. Does he agree that the legislation was brought
in exactly for heinous crimes such as the Worboys case?
I thank my hon. Friend for speaking so strongly on behalf of his
constituents. Colin Pitchfork’s offences were the gravest of
crimes, and the families of Lynda Mann and Dawn Ashworth still
live with the pain that he caused. The independent Parole Board’s
role is to assess whether he is safe for release, rather than
whether he has been punished enough. I understand why this
decision has affected public confidence. It has been reviewed by
officials in my Department, and we found arguable grounds that
the decision was irrational, so I have asked the Parole Board to
reconsider it using the mechanism that my hon. Friend rightly
identified.
(Edinburgh South West) (SNP) [V]
Can the Secretary of State tell us why the Ministry of Justice
has left the Stonewall Diversity Champions scheme? Can he
reassure me that his Department will continue to respect the
rights of all its LGBT employees, and indeed the rights of all
those with protected characteristics, including women and those
who hold gender-critical beliefs?
I am grateful to the hon. and learned Lady for that question. I
can absolutely assure her that the rights of LGBTQ+ people will
be respected, honoured and celebrated by my Department. We are
taking the fullest and most enthusiastic part in Pride Month,
which of course is now. The issue with regard to Stonewall was
simply this: my officials and I were no longer convinced that the
particular scheme that we had taken part in was the right use of
public money. There were concerns about the direction of that
organisation, which has done so much to advance the cause of
people of an LGBT+ orientation. It was with great sorrow and
regret that that decision was made, but I assure the hon. and
learned Lady that the underlying commitment to and passion for
those issues absolutely remains.
(East Devon) (Con)
Over 8,000 criminal cases are waiting to be resolved in Devon and
Cornwall. Many of my constituents in East Devon are anxiously
awaiting progress on their cases, and they feel no closer to
justice. What steps is my right hon. and learned Friend taking to
reducing the backlogs in Devon?
My hon. Friend is right to raise issues affecting his
constituents. He will be glad to know that in his region, huge
strides have been made in magistrates and Crown courts to deal
effectively with the case load. Based on the figures I see
regularly, I am encouraged by the progress being made in his
local courts. That is part of a national drive to deal with
capacity, which we have increased through Nightingale courts.
There is no limit on sitting days in the Crown court during the
year ahead. If all is well with the road map later in July, the
further easing of restrictions will allow even more cases to be
listed, so that justice can be delivered as quickly as possible,
both for my hon. Friend’s constituents and for the wider public.
