Moved by Lord Udny-Lister That the Bill be now read a second time.
Lord Udny-Lister (Con) My Lords, I am reminded of the fact that the
strength of your Lordships’ House is when we can come together to
improve legislation and close legislative loopholes in an attempt
to strengthen our democracy and protect the citizens of our
country. In this Second Reading, together we have the opportunity
to prevent sex offenders serving in local government. As
someone...Request free trial
Moved by
That the Bill be now read a second time.
(Con)
My Lords, I am reminded of the fact that the strength of your
Lordships’ House is when we can come together to improve
legislation and close legislative loopholes in an attempt to
strengthen our democracy and protect the citizens of our
country.
In this Second Reading, together we have the opportunity to
prevent sex offenders serving in local government. As someone
who, like many noble Lords present, started their public service
at the coalface of politics by serving as a local councillor—I
did so for 35 years—I was surprised, in fact horrified, to learn
that a loophole exists in our legislation that allows sex
offenders to avoid disqualification from local office.
When we consider the role of local councillors in the community,
we must think of the position of trust that they hold and the
work that they do, often with the most vulnerable members of our
society. I do not need to go into depth on this point, as the
duties undertaken by our local representatives, while perhaps not
celebrated enough, are well known to noble Lords present.
However, I reiterate from my own experience as both a former
councillor and a former council leader that, every day,
councillors and those holding local office across the country
work closely with children and vulnerable adults. We must
therefore do everything we can to ensure that those who are
convicted of a sexual offence are barred from the privilege of
serving their local communities on a local authority.
The loophole that exists is found in the legislation that covers
disqualification from office in local government. Noble Lords
will be aware that, if someone is subject to a custodial
sentence, they are automatically disqualified from their elected
post. However, bizarrely, when a sex offender does not receive a
custodial sentence but is still deemed to be that much of a
threat that they are placed on the sex offenders list, there is
nothing in law to prevent them taking up office in local
government.
The fact that someone who has committed offences of the most
grotesque nature can then be allowed to stand for election and
occupy a position of trust and responsibility in their community
is an outrageous flaw in our electoral law and something which I
hope that noble Lords will help to correct with the passage of
this Bill. In observing the proceedings and passage of the Bill
through the other place, I was appalled to learn that due to this
legislative loophole, individuals on the sex offender register
have been able to retain their seat after refusing to resign.
This is simply outrageous, as holders of office in local
government should, as the majority of them are, be people who
embody the values of public life and abide by the laws of this
land. This loophole casts an unsavoury shadow of doubt over the
security of the vulnerable, especially children, and we therefore
have a duty to come together, not only to strengthen our law but
to strengthen trust, integrity, and confidence, in our system of
local government.
We have before us a relatively short yet slightly complex Bill,
which seeks to remove the loophole I have just described. The
Bill is not intended to reform the complexities of other areas of
electoral law, nor should it be seen as an opportunity to bring
about wider disqualification clauses. The Bill is about acting
swiftly to safeguard the vulnerable. It will update the
disqualification criteria for local government members, including
councillors, mayors of combined authorities, the Mayor of London,
and London Assembly members, who are subject to relevant
notification requirements or orders due to their sexual
misconduct, preventing them not only standing for office but
remaining in office. If they have already been elected to serve,
we are aiming to fix the current as well as the future.
In this country, our system of local government is deeply rooted
in having strong local representation of people who are of good
character, worthy of trust and beyond reproach. Through the
Covid-19 pandemic, I witnessed first-hand a resurgence of the
role and duties carried out by our local officeholders on the
ground, and I can foresee the duties of our locally elected
representatives only being extended in the future. Therefore, we
must ensure that only those with integrity can stand to serve.
Those holding office in local government today are tasked with
making decisions on behalf of children and vulnerable adults.
Therefore, it is obvious that those trusted to make decisions
should be of irreputable character.
Our local representatives deserve our utmost respect. The vast
majority work tirelessly to strengthen the country and are the
very foundation of our democracy. However, sadly, there are rare
occasions when the behaviour of some falls below the standards
that the public expect, and when cracks appear in the foundations
of our democracy, we in this place must strive to seal the
gaps.
It should be noted that the Local Government Association, in its
quest to ensure that the highest standards of integrity and
conduct are present in public life, supports the objectives of
the Bill. The Bill received cross-party support in the House of
Commons and arrives in your Lordships’ House with the support of
Her Majesty’s Government. I thank , who championed the Bill
through the House of Commons, and the Government and opposition
parties for their support so far. I further pay tribute to the
officials who have combed through the complexity of our electoral
legislation to help ensure that the Bill is sufficiently primed
to close the loophole mentioned.
I hope your Lordships will look favourably on affording the Bill
a safe passage through this House, so that together we can close
a loophole and thus strengthen our democracy for the better. I
beg to move.
11.34am
(Lab)
My Lords, I welcome the Bill. Like many others in this House, I
was in local government and found it wonderful to be there, and I
find it wonderful to know that today we are trying to reform
these kinds of loopholes. I thank for bringing the Bill
forward and the Labour Party for giving it its full support.
We must ensure the highest standards of conduct and integrity in
local government. I hope this will be reflected in elections with
a higher turnout than we have seen in the last few years. I look
forward to seeing a better turnout. That is the object of the
Bill. The Local Government Association supports it. I support it.
It sets out grounds of disqualification for members of local
authorities in England, including parish councillors, members of
combined authorities, the Mayor of London and London Assembly
members.
The Bill asserts new grounds of disqualification relating to
sexual offences, expanding the criteria to include being on the
sex offender register or being subject to a sexual risk order
under the Sexual Offences Act. These individuals should not be
able to run for public office or retain their seat if already
elected. Recent cases have restated the need for reform.
I have one criticism: the Bill does not go far enough. It should
also include Members of this House, Members of the House of
Commons and the police and crime commissioners, and it should be
extended throughout the United Kingdom.
11.36am
(Con)
My Lords, I approach the Bill from a somewhat Janus point of
view. I welcome its contents but, rather like the noble Baroness,
Lady Goudie, I am concerned about its nature, in that it does not
cover other elements. When I spoke at the Second Reading of the
Elections Bill, I identified—the noble Baroness, Lady Hayman
picked up this—that there are 25 major pieces of legislation
relating to elections. Our election law is a mess. Unfortunately,
this piece of legislation just adds another point to it. A matter
that I will return to in Committee on the Elections Bill is
precisely this point: we are passing a piece of legislation to
exclude certain people from certain elected offices, but we are
not excluding those same people from other elected offices. There
is a complete mess in relation to those banned from local
councils, those banned from standing for office as police and
crime commissioners and those banned from being in this House or
the House of Commons. It is somewhat ironic that there are fewer
restrictions on people being elected as Members of Parliament
than as police and crime commissioners and councillors. Somebody
could therefore become Prime Minister with far fewer restrictions
imposed on them than if they were to be a local councillor.
In conclusion, I add one other observation. It is not directly
relevant to the Bill but it relates to a frame of mind. There is
a tendency in this day and age for all parties to disown
candidates who have made comments on social media that are
regrettable but were often made when they were youngsters. Then,
in the haste and fear of an election, the candidate is disowned
and dropped. All parties should address this issue. It is not
relevant to the Bill, but it is well worth all parties giving
serious consideration to how they cope with the content of social
media which in many cases people made in their youth.
Overall, I welcome the Bill but regret the circumstances under
which it is coming forward because, as the noble Baroness, Lady
Goudie, said, there should be other similar disqualifications and
a general review of disqualifications for all elected
offices.
11.39am
of Ullock (Lab)
My Lords, I shall be brief and begin by confirming that the
Labour Party fully endorses this proposed legislation. I also pay
tribute to for promoting this important
Bill in the other place and to the noble Lord, , for sponsoring it in
your Lordships’ House. As my noble friend Lady Goudie just said,
it is also supported by the Local Government Association.
As we have heard, as it currently stands, sex offenders who avoid
a custodial sentence are not disqualified from running for local
government positions in England and Wales. We know that people
often seek out elected representatives when they are at their
most vulnerable and in deepest crisis. Those of us who have held
such office, whether at council level or here, know that we see
more vulnerable people than we would really like to and,
importantly, we can vouch for being that support and backdrop for
thousands of people, day in and day out.
As legislation, the Bill is very specific and small but, if
passed, will have a huge impact because it will close the
loophole that allows sex offenders to hold respected positions
where they will have contact with these vulnerable people. I am
particularly concerned about children in care, whom councillors
are expected to protect. The noble Lord, , rightly said that, if
this goes through, it will strengthen our democracy.
I also pick up the important point made by my noble friend Lady
Goudie and the noble Lord, , about needing consistency
across all elections when we are choosing our representatives. It
is only right that the representatives elected to carry out these
important roles are fit and proper people. As the noble Lord,
, said, they should embody
the values of public life. It is unacceptable that a small
loophole in existing legislation means that people who should be
looking out for the most vulnerable are in a position where we
might still doubt that that is the case. It is important that the
change to disqualification criteria is made in relation to all
representations, with a particular focus on those who act as
corporate parents, as councillors often do. Labour fully supports
the Bill and is pleased that the Government are taking it
forward.
11.42am
The Minister of State, Home Office and Department for Levelling
Up, Housing & Communities () (Con)
I thank noble Lords, in particular my noble friend , for sponsoring this
Private Member’s Bill. I also congratulate the honourable Member
for Mole Valley, , for all the work he has
done to progress this Bill through the other place. The two of
them share one thing in common: they were both leaders of
Wandsworth, which is known, by them at least, as “the brighter
borough”. I served for 20 years in Hammersmith and Fulham, and
learned an awful lot from them and from what they achieved for
their local residents. My noble friend has an unrivalled record,
certainly when I compare it to mine. As he said in his speech, he
served as a councillor for 35 years, with great distinction,
and—I do not know how he survived it—19 years as leader of a
London borough. That requires some survival instinct; it is quite
incredible. Beyond that, he served five years in City Hall, along
with the then mayor, Mayor Johnson, before completing the pyramid
with two years in Downing Street. It is great that this Bill is
sponsored by my noble friend, whom I very much consider a
mentor.
The Government support the Bill for three main reasons. First,
preventing registered sex offenders from either standing or
serving as councillors, mayors or London Assembly members will
strengthen communities’ faith and confidence in their elected
representatives. Secondly, the Bill delivers on the Government’s
stated commitment to bring local government disqualification into
line with modern sentencing practice for sexual offences.
Thirdly, the electorate has a right to expect that the people who
stand and serve to represent them and their local communities are
of good character.
The current disqualification criteria for local government
candidates and councillors will automatically disqualify anyone
for five years if they are convicted of a custodial sentence of
three months or more, suspended or not. This rule dates back to
the Local Government Act 1972. However, while the existing law is
still effective in addressing serious cases of criminal
behaviour, it does not take account of the non-custodial
sentences the courts now issue for certain categories of sexual
offences. This means that some individuals who are convicted and
who ought to be disqualified do not meet the current threshold
and can therefore slip through the net.
Noble Lords have indicated that they agree with me and the
Government that it is quite intolerable that people deemed by the
courts to pose a risk to children and vulnerable adults are not
barred from serving as members of local authorities. The Bill
rights that wrong by updating the law to ensure that only fit and
proper persons can stand or serve as locally elected officials.
We know, of course, that the vast majority of local authority
members serving their communities are of good character, worthy
of trust and beyond reproach. But, with some 120,000 councillors
in England, there have inevitably been cases in which the
behaviour of elected officials has fallen well below the
standards the public expect and deserve.
(Lab)
The noble Lord, , referred to two excluded
categories. Why were they excluded, as this is probably an
off-the-shelf Bill?
(Con)
I was going to come to that; I was not going to finish my speech
without addressing that point, but I will bring it forward a
paragraph or two. The answer to why this does not apply to MPs,
as was raised by my noble friend , or to PCCs, as was raised by
the noble Baroness, Lady Goudie, is that standards and conduct
for MPs and PCCs are governed under separate regimes, with their
own mechanisms to disqualify or sanction unacceptable behaviour.
There is currently the power to recall a MP, under certain
circumstances, if at least 10% of the constituency electorate
signs a petition. I take the general point: this Bill tidies up
this issue, but there is another regime in place. I think my
noble friend alluded to that point.
I had better resume from where I was. We know that the vast
majority of local authority members serving their communities are
of good character, worthy of trust and beyond reproach. That is
one of the reasons why, in 2018, the Government responded to a
consultation to update the local government criteria with a
commitment to legislate on this matter. This was, in part, in
response to an infamous case in which a parish councillor,
shortly after being elected, was convicted of possessing indecent
images of children. He was placed on the sex offender register
but not given a custodial sentence. Despite repeated calls for
him to resign, he refused to stand down and actually remained a
parish councillor for the full term. The law as it stands allowed
him to continue to do so, but this Bill would prevent such
circumstances occurring again.
These new disqualification criteria will protect our communities
by barring such individuals from holding office while they remain
subject to the notification requirements for sexual offences or
subject to a sexual risk order. Where offenders pose such a
severe risk to the public that they are subject to indefinite
notification requirements, communities can feel safe in the
knowledge that such individuals will remain disqualified from
elected office for the entire duration.
On its remit with regard to the devolved Administrations, I
should state that the Bill applies to England only, as much of
local government is devolved. The Scottish Parliament can make
corresponding provision and the Welsh Government legislated on
this matter last year. That said, since the UK Government retain
the responsibility for elections in Northern Ireland, we will
work with the Northern Ireland Executive to extend these measures
there too, with a comprehensive package addressing the rules that
govern both candidates and sitting councillors.
The Government strongly believe that there should be severe
penalties for locally elected councillors who break the bonds of
trust that hold local democracy together. This Bill puts that
principle into practice, while ensuring that local government can
continue to command people’s faith and trust, both now and in
future. The Government are therefore delighted to support the
Bill.
11.49am
(Con)
My Lords, I say thank you very much to the noble Baronesses, Lady
Goudie and Lady Hayman, the noble Lord, , and the Minister for their
support for this Bill. In particular, I thank the LGA, which has
been very supportive on its journey. I fully understand the
arguments about why this should be widened to other groups, but
an argument has been clearly made by the Minister about why that
should be done by other mechanisms in another place. This will
deal with the problem in local government and I urge you to
support it. I also thank the Minister for his kind words.
Bill read a second time and committed to a Committee of the Whole
House.
|
