Metropolitan Police: Casey Review Mr Speaker Given the importance
of the issues raised by the statement we are about to hear, I am
waiving the House’s sub judice resolution. However, I would ask
Members to exercise caution and avoid referring to the detail of
any cases that are currently or soon to be before the courts, to
avoid any risk of prejudicing proceedings, particularly criminal
ones. I call the Home Secretary. 12.34pm The Secretary of State for
the...Request free trial
Metropolitan Police:
Casey Review
Mr Speaker
Given the importance of the issues raised by the statement we are
about to hear, I am waiving the House’s sub judice resolution.
However, I would ask Members to exercise caution and avoid
referring to the detail of any cases that are currently or soon
to be before the courts, to avoid any risk of prejudicing
proceedings, particularly criminal ones. I call the Home
Secretary.
12.34pm
The Secretary of State for the Home Department ()
With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement on
Baroness Casey’s review of the Metropolitan police. I wish to put
on record my thanks to Baroness Casey for undertaking the review
on such a difficult and sensitive topic with the utmost
professionalism.
The Metropolitan Police Service plays a big role in our country:
tackling crime throughout the capital and keeping 9 million
Londoners safe; preventing terrorism nationally; and managing
significant threats to our capital and country. I back the
police. I trust them to put their safety before ours, to step
into danger to protect the most vulnerable, and to support all of
us at our most fearful, painful and tragic moments. Many of us
can never imagine the challenges that regular police officers
face every day. That is particularly poignant as tomorrow marks
the sixth anniversary of the murder of PC in the line of duty while he
was protecting all of us in this place. For their contribution, I
am sure all Members will join me in thanking the police for their
work.
But there have been growing concerns around the performance of
the Metropolitan police and its ability to command the confidence
and trust of Londoners. That follows a series of abhorrent cases
of officers who betrayed the public’s trust and hideously abused
their powers. In June last year, His Majesty’s inspectorate of
constabulary and fire and rescue services announced that the
force would be put into an Engage phase. In July, the Government
appointed Sir Mark Rowley to the post of Metropolitan Police
Commissioner, with the express purpose of turning the
organisation around.
Today’s report, commissioned by Sir Mark’s predecessor, makes for
very concerning reading. It is clear that there have been serious
failures of culture, leadership and standards in the Metropolitan
police. That is why Sir Mark Rowley’s top priority since becoming
commissioner has been to deliver a plan to turn around the Met
and restore confidence in policing in London. Baroness Casey’s
report finds: deep-seated cultural issues in the force;
persistent poor planning and short-termism; a failure of local
accountability; insularity and defensiveness; and a lack of focus
on core areas of policing, including public protection. She also
highlights the recent decline in trust and confidence in the Met
among London’s diverse communities.
The report underlines the fact that the Met faces a long road to
recovery. Improvements must be made as swiftly as possible, but
some of the huge challenges for the organisation may take years
to fully address. Baroness Casey is clear that Sir Mark and
deputy commissioner Lynne Owens accept the scale of those
challenges. I know that to be true from my own work with them. I
will ensure that the Metropolitan police has all the support it
needs from central Government to deliver on Sir Mark’s pledge of
more trust, less crime and high standards. Every officer in the
force needs to be part of making those changes happen.
As I said as soon as I became Home Secretary, I want all forces
to focus relentlessly on common sense policing that stops crime
and keeps the public safe. The Government are already providing
the Metropolitan police with support to do just that. Funding for
the force will be up to £3.3 billion in 2023, a cash increase of
£178 million compared with 2010, and the force has by far the
highest funding per capita in England and Wales. As a result of
the Government’s police uplift programme, the Metropolitan police
has more officers than ever before—over 35,000 as of December.
The Home Office is providing funding to the force to deliver
innovative projects to tackle drug misuse and county lines. We
are working with police and health partners to roll out a
national “right care, right person” model, to free up frontline
officers to focus on investigating, fighting crime and ensuring
that people in mental health crises get the right care from the
right agency at the right time.
It is vital that the law-abiding public do not face a threat from
the police themselves. Those who are not fit to wear the uniform
must be prevented from doing so. Where they are revealed, they
must be driven out of the force and face justice. We have taken
steps to ensure that forces tackle weaknesses in their vetting
systems. I have listened to Sir Mark and his colleagues; the Home
Office is reviewing the police dismissals process to ensure that
officers who fall short of expected standards can be quickly
dismissed. The findings of Baroness Casey’s review will help to
inform the work of Lady Angiolini, whose independent inquiry,
established by the Government, will look at broader issues of
police standards and culture.
I would like to turn to two particularly concerning aspects of
Baroness Casey’s report. First, it addresses questions of racism,
misogyny and homophobia within the Metropolitan police. Baroness
Casey has identified evidence of discriminatory behaviour among
officers. I commend those officers who came forward to share
their awful experiences with the review team. Discrimination must
be tackled in all its forms, and I welcome Sir Mark’s commitment
to do so. I will be holding the Metropolitan police and the Mayor
of London to account by measuring their progress. I ask Londoners
to judge Sir Mark and the Mayor of London not on their words but
on their actions to stamp out racist, misogynistic and homophobic
behaviour. Action not words has been something that victims of
police misconduct and criminal activity have asked for.
Secondly, officers working in the parliamentary and diplomatic
protection command perform a vital function in protecting our
embassies and keeping us, as Members of Parliament, safe on the
parliamentary estate. Baroness Casey’s report is scathing in its
analysis of the command’s culture. The whole House will be
acutely aware of two recent cases of officers working in that
command committing the most abhorrent crimes. I expect the
Metropolitan police to ensure that reforms reflect the gravity of
her findings, while ensuring that the command’s critical security
functions are maintained. The Home Office and the parliamentary
security department will work closely with the Metropolitan
police to ensure that that happens.
Although I work closely with the Metropolitan police, primary and
political accountability sits with the Mayor of London, as
Baroness Casey makes clear. I spoke with the Mayor yesterday; we
are united in our support for the new commissioner and his plan
to turn around the Met so that Londoners get the police service
they deserve. We all depend on the police, who overwhelmingly do
a very difficult job bravely and well. It is vital that all
officers maintain the very highest standards that the public
expect of them. Londoners demand nothing less. I have every
confidence that Sir Mark Rowley and his team will deliver that
for them. I commend this statement to the House.
Mr Speaker
I call the shadow Home Secretary.
12.43pm
(Normanton, Pontefract and
Castleford) (Lab)
The report published today by , commissioned by the Mayor of
London, into standards and culture in the Metropolitan police
service is thorough, forensic and truly damning. It finds that
consent is broken, management of the force has failed and
frontline policing,—especially neighbourhood policing—has been
deprioritised and degraded after a decade of austerity in which
the Met has ended up with £0.7 billion less than at the beginning
of the decade. It finds that the Met is failing women and
children, and that predatory and unacceptable behaviour has been
allowed to flourish. It finds institutional racism, misogyny and
homophobia.
Baroness Casey pays tribute to the work that police officers do
and the bravery that they show every day, as we all should,
because across the country we depend on the work that police
officers do to keep us all safe—catching criminals, protecting
the vulnerable and saving lives. We support them in that vital
work. But that is what makes it all the more important that the
highest standards are maintained and the confidence of those the
police serve is sustained, otherwise communities and the vital
work that police officers do are let down. We support the work
the new Met commissioner is doing now to start turning the Met
around. He and his team must now go much further in response to
the Casey review, but I am concerned that the Home Secretary’s
statement is dangerously complacent. Astonishingly, there is no
new action set out in her response, simply words saying that the
Met must change. This is a continuation of the hands-off Home
Office response that Baroness Casey criticises in her report.
Some of the issues raised are particular to the Met because of
its size, history and particular culture, where the Home
Secretary and Mayor are jointly responsible for oversight and
where the commissioner is responsible for delivering, but the
report also raises serious wider issues for the Home Office.
The failure to root out officers who have been involved in
domestic abuse or sexual assault also applies in other forces.
The failure to tackle culture has gone wrong in other forces too,
with problems in Gwent, Hampshire, Police Scotland, Sussex,
Leicestershire and more. It is a disgrace that there are still
not mandatory requirements on vetting and training, underpinned
by law, and that misconduct systems are still too weak. I urge
the Home Secretary to commit now that anyone under investigation
for domestic abuse or sexual assault will be automatically
suspended from their role as a police officer, and that anyone
with any kind of history of domestic abuse or sexual assault will
not be given any chance to become a police officer. We need an
urgent overhaul, underpinned by law. Will she give us that
commitment today?
The Home Office approach more widely to standards is also
failing. Six police forces are in so-called special measures, but
it is still too easy for forces to ignore the recommendations
from the inspectorate and the intervention processes are too
weak. Where is the Home Secretary’s plan to turn that around?
The report is damning about the decimation of frontline policing,
but neighbourhood policing has been decimated everywhere, not
just in the Met. There are 6,000 fewer police officers in
neighbourhood teams and 8,000 fewer police community support
officers than just in 2016, and it is worse than that because
officers are routinely abstracted for other duties. So where is
the plan to restore neighbourhood policing? Labour has set out a
plan. We would work with the Government on this, but where is the
Government’s plan?
The report is devastating on the lack of proper public protection
arrangements for women and children who have been let down, but
again we know that across the country prosecutions for rape and
domestic abuse have plummeted and serious cases have too often
been dismissed. Again, where is the national action plan to
improve public protection? Where is the commitment to specialist
rape investigation units in every force and specialist domestic
abuse experts in 999 control rooms? It is not happening.
The findings on institutional misogyny, racism and homophobia are
based on evidence and clear criteria that Baroness Casey has set
out for measuring change with recommendations. The Home Secretary
rightly says she wants discrimination tackled in all its forms,
but she has been telling police forces the opposite in telling
them not to focus on those issues. Where is her plan now to turn
that around? Where is the Home Office plan in response to this,
on standards, on neighbourhood policing, on violence against
women and girls, and on systemic or institutional discrimination?
Where are those plans?
The British policing model is precious. The Peel principles,
which started in London— policing by consent—said
“that the police are the public and that the public are the
police”.
They are our guardians, not our guards, but that precious
policing model is in peril. The Home Office and the Home
Secretary are the custodians of that tradition, but the lack of
any plan to restore trust, to stand up for policing or to turn
things around is letting everyone down. It is not standing up for
the police; it is letting both the police and communities down.
It is because we believe in policing and because we believe in
those Peel principles that we know standing up for the police
also means working with the police to deliver change and to
restore the trust, confidence and effective policing that all
police officers and communities properly deserve.
I must say that I am disappointed by the right hon. Lady’s tone.
Today is not a day for crass political point scoring; it is a day
for serious and sober consideration of the Met’s shortcomings and
how those shortcomings have a devastating impact on people’s
lives. The victims have asked for actions, not words, and I,
along with the Mayor of London, have every confidence that Sir
Mark Rowley and his team will deliver their plan to turn around
the Met. Accepting Baroness Casey’s findings is not incompatible
with supporting the institution of policing and the vast majority
of brave men and women who uphold the highest professional
standards. I back the police; I trust them to put their safety
before ours.
On the topic of national standards, I am working with chief
constables on a programme to drive up standards and improve
culture across police forces at a national level. On the topic of
institutional racism, I agree with Sir Mark Rowley. It is not a
helpful term to use; it is an ambiguous, contested and
politically charged term that is much misused and risks making it
harder for officers to win back the trust of communities. Sir
Mark is committed to rooting out discrimination, in all forms,
from the Met. I believe that it is how the Met police respond to
the issues that is important, not whether they accept a
label.
Trust in the police is fundamental, and I will work to support
Sir Mark Rowley in his work to change culture and provide the
leadership that the Met needs, but I would point out to the
shadow Home Secretary that her crass political attacks really
would be more accurately directed at the person with actual and
political responsibility for overseeing the performance of the
Met: that is the Mayor of London, Labour’s . The Labour Mayor has been in
charge of the Met for the past seven years. Baroness Casey is
unflinching and unequivocal about the dysfunctional relationship
between the Mayor’s office and the Met, and her recommendation
that the Mayor takes a more hands-on approach. It was frankly
shocking to learn that the Labour Mayor does not already chair a
quarterly board meeting to exercise accountability over the Met.
I trust the shadow Home Secretary will agree that the Mayor
accepts Baroness Casey’s recommendation that he do so.
Londoners have been let down by the Met. The shadow Home
Secretary knows who is ultimately responsible for that. She
should not be looking to score political points today: it is a
disappointment, and frankly she should know better.
Mr Speaker
I call the Father of the House.
(Worthing West) (Con)
Everyone in the House will back up what the Home Secretary,
Baroness Casey and the shadow Home Secretary have said about our
reliance on the police and our support for them, but there are
times when we have to look at how often the police, the police
authority, the Mayor and the Home Secretary have not put things
right.
I will give as an example the high-profile case of the Sikh
police officer Gurpal Virdi, who 25 years ago was in effect
accused of doing something he had not done. We had the Muir
report at the end of 2001, which showed what the police ought to
do to do things right. We had the report by Sir William Morris,
as he then was, in 2004. Before that we had had the Stephen
Lawrence inquiry by Sir William Macpherson, advised by the former
police officer Tom Cook, by the human rights expert Dr Richard
Stone and by John Sentamu, who later became the . What they recommended
has not happened.
Now we have the Casey report. I say to the commissioner of the
Met police, to the Mayor and to my right hon. and learned Friend
the Home Secretary: have a review into what happened in the
Gurpal Virdi case, including his prosecution eight years ago for
a non-offence, where the only evidence exonerated him. Until that
is done, people will not have confidence in people putting things
right. It may be one case, and many other examples will be given
in the next few minutes, but Sergeant Gurpal Virdi has been the
victim of more injustice from the police, over decades, than I
have ever seen in my life.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right about the devastating stories
of misconduct, inappropriate behaviour, discrimination and poor
standards. No one is denying that. Baroness Casey’s review is
unequivocal about the failings, cultural and more widespread,
within the Met. It is right now that we need to see real change.
The Met commissioner has put in place a plan. He is already
working and making progress on increasing standards, improving
behaviour and ridding the force of those who do not deserve to
wear the badge. We should all get behind him in that
objective.
Mr Speaker
I call the Chair of the Select Committee on Home Affairs.
(Kingston upon Hull North)
(Lab)
The findings of institutional racism in the Met made 24 years
ago, the findings of institutional corruption in the case of
Daniel Morgan more recently, the homophobia in the botched
Stephen Port investigation, the misogyny, homophobia and racism
in the Charing Cross inquiry, the criminal misconduct of police
officers in the murders of Bibaa Henry and Nicole Smallman, the
strip-searching of Child Q, the numerous Independent Office for
Police Conduct investigations and damning HMICFRS reports, the
abduction, rape and murder by a serving police officer and the
case of the serial sex offender David Carrick were all not enough
to provoke real change, so can the Home Secretary say what is now
different about this report? Is she confident that the Met can
change?
It is clear just from the examples to which the right hon. Lady
refers and from this report that all the behaviour, including
instances of racism, homophobia and misogyny, is completely
unacceptable and that standards must improve. Sir Mark has been
clear that he is not shying away from the enormity of the
challenge. He has a plan in place to ensure that standards are
increased, that more rigour is instilled in the Met and that
there is a better and more robust response when standards fall
short. It is absolutely vital that they rebuild trust and improve
standards so that all Londoners have confidence in the Met.
(East Worthing and Shoreham) (Con)
This is a shocking report, and it is particularly galling for the
majority of decent officers who do an outstanding job day in, day
out. Whether or not we think the Met is institutionally racist,
misogynist or homophobic, it is certainly institutionally
incapable of bringing in strong and consistent leadership,
although I exclude the new commissioner from that, or of
recruiting enough people of sufficient calibre to make good
officers. Does the Home Secretary share my concerns that the
police’s solutions are still too much about bringing in more
police to mark the homework of other police? Has she given
thought to bringing in leading people from other disciplines such
as the Army or business to provide proper, independent executive
scrutiny and promote new ways of working?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right that standards need to improve
and that doing more of the same is not acceptable. Ultimately,
independent scrutiny is provided for by the Mayor of London’s
office; those are independent, publicly accountable individuals
who bring that outside scrutiny. Baroness Casey’s report is clear
that that has not been good enough to date. That is why we all
need to get behind the Met to ensure that standards improve.
(Brent Central) (Lab)
I am struggling to establish the point of the Home Secretary when
it comes to the Met. With this hands-off approach, it is as
though nothing is the her responsibility. When the Mayor of
London got rid of the last commissioner, the Home Secretary
continually attacked the Mayor of London’s correct decision. We
have heard about all the other reports, including the 1981
Scarman report on the Brixton riots, the 1999 Stephen Lawrence
report, the 2021 IOPC report on Nicole Smallman and Bibaa Henry,
and the 2021 report on Daniel Morgan, which found that the police
were institutionally corrupt. The IOPC report on the Stephen Port
murders found that the police were homophobic, and some of them
are still working in Barking. Operation Hotton made 15
recommendations; those recommendations have still not been
implemented in the Met. Why is the Home Secretary not taking any
responsibility in her role in the Met? If she does not want the
responsibility, for goodness’ sake, will she just stand down?
I am afraid that the hon. Lady needs to direct some of her
criticism towards the person who is directly responsible for the
performance of the Met: that is, unfortunately, her Labour
colleague the Mayor of London. He has been on the receiving end
of particular criticism in the report, although I am glad to hear
that he is forward-leaning in accepting the recommendations and
turning around the way in which he is holding the Met to account.
When it comes to changing the law or introducing any frameworks
that are necessary, we in the Home Office will do that—we are
already consulting on the dismissals process, and we have
instituted a regime of better vetting with the College of
Policing—but I am afraid that, ultimately, the hon. Lady’s ire
should be focused on her colleague in London.
(Witham) (Con)
The sad reality is that, as Opposition Members have just
highlighted, over the past 18 months we have seen report after
report, and it is now incumbent on us, if we are to secure the
whole notion of policing by consent and to elevate public trust
and confidence in policing, to see action going forward. The
Casey review identifies a range of directions that are required
across the board. May I suggest to the Home Secretary, and indeed
the Mayor of London, that we should start to see a performance
plan for the Metropolitan police to ensure that individuals are
held to account? We have strong leaders in the new commissioner
and his deputy, and we need to back them, but given the amount of
money that goes into the Metropolitan police, I think that that
money should bring about the outcomes, such as performance
changes, that the British public, and the people of London in
particular, desperately want to see.
My right hon. Friend is absolutely right, and I pay tribute to
her leadership in respect of positive change and improving police
standards when she was in this role. I do back Sir Mark and his
team: he is the right person to lead the organisation towards
reform and improvement. He has set out a turnaround plan and is
making progress in realising its objectives, and it is vital that
we support him in that.
(Hammersmith) (Lab)
Like many London MPs, I deal with constituency cases—from modern
slavery to stalking—in which ethnicity, gender or sexuality is a
factor, but the victims complain that those factors are not taken
seriously by police investigators. What can I tell them that the
Home Secretary will do, following this damning report, to give
them dignity, respect and, above all, justice?
Discriminatory attitudes and homophobic, racist or misogynistic
behaviour have no place in policing. All the case studies and
references in the report make for shocking reading. The ability
of the police to fulfil their duties is essential, but what we
have seen is a real impediment preventing chief constables from
dismissing and getting rid of officers who are not fit to wear
the badge, for a host of reasons. We in the Home Office are
currently consulting on the dismissals process, and if necessary
I will change the law to empower chief constables to better
control the quality of the officers in their ranks.
(North West Hampshire) (Con)
For anyone who, like me, has worked with the Metropolitan police
over many years, this is a dark if not catastrophic day. While
our thoughts are primarily with the many victims who have been
let down and failed by the force, obviously we all reserve a huge
amount of disappointment for the officers who do a startlingly
good job every single day. Many of us who have visited the Met
will have seen their work over the years.
I hope the Home Secretary will agree that key to turning the
force around is ensuring that this becomes a joint enterprise
between City Hall and the Home Office. There has clearly been a
failure of local accountability—and I speak as someone who has
urged the Mayor, both in public and in private, to lean into the
governance of the Metropolitan police during his time in office.
On that note, would it be possible for the Policing Minister to
sit on the new board that Baroness Casey wants to be convened to
supervise changes within the Met, and will the Home Secretary
discuss that with the Mayor?
I hope that the Home Secretary will also agree that key to
turning around policing in general is the professionalisation of
the workforce. She recently decided to cancel the policing
education qualifications framework route into policing, although
it held out the promise of the kind of continuing professional
development that many people believe police officers need during
their careers to keep them on the straight and narrow, in terms
of values and operational practice. Will she reconsider her
decision to cancel that project?
My right hon. Friend makes an important point about the quality
of accountability. The report identified a dysfunctional
relationship between the force and the Mayor’s Office for
Policing and Crime, and the Mayor needs to ensure it is reset as
a matter of urgency. That local accountability is absolutely
critical if we are to see meaningful improvement. My right hon.
Friend also referred to leadership training within the ranks,
which is something I am very interested in. We are making
progress with the College of Policing, in particular, towards
rolling out better leadership training in order to create a good
cohort of leaders in policing for the future.
(Battersea) (Lab)
Nearly 25 years after the Macpherson report, it is damning that
the Casey review has found that the Met remains institutionally
racist, and is now misogynistic and homophobic as well. Its
actions can seriously undermine policing by consent, and without
wholesale reform it will be impossible to rebuild trust and
confidence in our communities in London. My constituents in
Battersea deserve a force they can trust, so will the Home
Secretary end the postcode lottery that exists in place of
standards by implementing national standards in relation to
vetting, misconduct and training?
We are already working with the College of Policing to ensure
that there is a statutory code setting out the standards for
vetting and recruitment. However, as Baroness Casey makes clear,
it is vital that the law-abiding public never face a threat from
the police themselves. Those who are not fit to wear the badge
should be rooted out, but they should never enter the force in
the first place.
(Romsey and Southampton
North) (Con)
My right hon. Friend is absolutely right to say that every police
officer has to be part of the solution, but when a female officer
comments to Baroness Casey that she would have been better off
suffering in silence, that does not engender confidence in women
across the capital—including, importantly, women serving in the
Metropolitan Police Service—that they will be empowered to speak
out. What specific measures can my right hon. Friend reassure us
will be put in place to ensure that those good officers, who we
know make up the bulk of the Metropolitan Police Service, are
supported when they speak out, and do not see their own careers
suffer?
The turnaround plan deals specifically with how to institute a
better framework so that people who are on the receiving end of
unacceptable behaviour can report incidents in the knowledge that
they will not be penalised for doing so, and ensuring that those
who are perpetrators of, or responsible for, unacceptable
behaviour receive meaningful sanction and are no longer permitted
to wear the badge.
(Twickenham) (LD)
While there are many dedicated and decent police officers who
serve our capital with integrity and professionalism, Londoners’
confidence in the Met police will be utterly shattered by the
horrors and systemic failures revealed in Baroness Casey’s
report—and I dare say that the party political point scoring we
are hearing from the Dispatch Box will not help. Does the Home
Secretary really think that next time I visit a school or college
in my constituency, I shall be able to look a young woman or
person of colour in the eye and tell them to pick up the phone to
the police when they are in danger, or indeed consider a career
in the Met?
The report is scathing in tracking and describing incidents of
misogyny and the way in which confidence has been broken among
women and girls, and it is therefore vital that we work with the
Met police to restore that confidence. The Soteria programme, to
which Baroness Casey expressly refers, must be rolled out and
implemented meaningfully when it comes to the investigation and
prosecution of rape and serious sexual offences. We are already
seeing some improvement in police referrals of rape complaints to
the Crown Prosecution Service, but it is clear that, although we
are on the right track, more must be done.
(Hendon) (Con)
The immediate political acceptance of Baroness Casey’s report
demonstrates that nothing has changed since the publication of
the Macpherson report 24 years ago. Many think that the report in
itself is a panacea to change. Does the Home Secretary not agree
that it would be more effective to abolish the Metropolitan
Police Service, transfer the specialist operations to the remit
of the Home Office and establish a police service for London to
focus solely on the maintenance of law and order?
I do not agree that we must abolish the Metropolitan Police
Service. I think we need to institute a wide-ranging programme of
profound reform, and that is why I think that Sir Mark is
absolutely right in his turnaround plan, which deals specifically
with the systemic problems—problems that, unfortunately, are not
new but of which we are all aware—that need root-and-branch
reform. That is why he is in the right position to effect that
change.
(Feltham and Heston)
(Lab/Co-op)
I want to put on record my thanks to Baroness Casey for her
report, but it has reached the damning verdict that London’s
women and children have been left even further behind. The report
states:
“The de-prioritisation and de-specialisation of public protection
has put women and children at greater risk than necessary.
Despite some outstanding, experienced senior officers, an
overworked, inexperienced workforce polices child protection,
rape and serious sexual offences.”
Her report recommends specialist units to deal with violence
against women and girls, and it is clear that this must happen
across the country. Will the Home Secretary today back Labour’s
plans to introduce 999 specialist call handlers for domestic
abuse and specialist rape units in every police force, or bring
forward her own urgent plans to do so?
I take violence against women and girls extremely seriously. That
is why I added VAWG to the strategic policing requirement,
meaning that it is set out as a national threat for forces to
deal with specifically. We are funding the first full-time
national policing lead for VAWG, DCC Maggie Blyth, who is driving
improvements in the police responses. We are also providing up to
£3.3 million for domestic abuse matters and consulting on
increasing the powers that police have in responding to this
heinous crime. There are many measures and initiatives that we
have brought in over the years, and I am proud of this
Government’s track record on supporting women and girls.
(Cities of London and
Westminster) (Con)
Baroness Casey’s review makes for grim reading, and I pay tribute
to her hard work and forensic gathering of evidence. We must
remember that that evidence is available thanks to the many
police officers who were brave enough to speak to Baroness Casey
for her review. Next month marks the 30th anniversary of Stephen
Lawrence’s murder, and we have seen from Baroness Casey’s review
that things have not progressed, even though we have had inquiry
after inquiry. Does my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary agree
that the time has now ended and we must ensure that the
Metropolitan Police Service cleans itself up, and that the Mayor
of London has a major part to play in ensuring that police
officers are held to account?
My hon. Friend is right to say that discriminatory attitudes and
behaviours, whether racism, misogyny or homophobia, have no place
in policing. I was appalled to read the shocking stories in the
report. We need to ensure that the police act with the highest
levels of honesty and integrity. We have to ensure that standards
are improved, that we strengthen vetting, and that there is
better police training and a more diverse leadership pipeline.
All those measures, supported by the Mayor of London, will bring
about real change.
(Hayes and Harlington)
(Lab)
I associate myself with the words of the Father of the House
about Gurpal Virdi. The relationship between the Metropolitan
police and the Asian community, particularly in west London, was
damaged by that case and also by the failure of the Met to
properly investigate the death of my constituent Ricky Reel 25
years ago. It was subsequently discovered, when Ricky’s family
were appealing for more police resources, that police resources
were being applied to surveilling the family and the campaign
itself.
The new commissioner has launched a new inquiry with a new
inquiry team, but we need the assistance of the Home Secretary in
releasing the confidential report that was undertaken by the
Police Complaints Authority in the late 1990s exposing the
failures of the original investigation, as well as the family
liaison officer logs that were kept during that period, so that
we can again look at what happened to Ricky subsequent to the
racial attack that he suffered. The ownership of those documents
is with the Home Secretary, not with the Met commissioner. I
wrote to the Home Secretary in February about this. Please can I
have a positive reply as soon as possible, to reassure the
family?
It is clear that the Met needs to command the confidence of all
communities, including those from black and ethnic groups, in
London. That is why Sir Mark’s turnaround plan specifically
covers better engagement with communities; it is vital that trust
is rebuilt within those communities. There are lots of measures
in train and I know that the Met commissioner takes very
seriously the relationship and the trust among communities. I
will look into the specific issue to which the right hon.
Gentleman refers.
Mr (Old Bexley and Sidcup)
(Con)
Today’s findings are very concerning and I know that my right
hon. and learned Friend will do what she can to hold the Met and
the Labour Mayor—the police and crime commissioner for London—to
account after seven years of failure. What assurances can she
provide that the thousands of decent and hard-working police
officers can continue to focus on fighting crime, which I believe
is the best way to restore public trust? Will she please urge the
Met to reverse Sadiq Khan’s tri-borough policing policy, which
continues to negatively impact policing in Bexley and starve it
of resources?
Thanks to this Government, the Met now has a record number of
police officers—the highest it has ever known in its history.
That increase in meaningful resource on the frontline will make a
difference to how it effectively polices and safeguards
Londoners. We have also seen a cash increase in Met funding since
2010, and that is being put into increased resources. It is vital
that we now work with Sir Mark and his team to ensure that there
is a proper turnaround.
(Hornsey and Wood Green)
(Lab)
It is clear that some basic policies and procedures have gone
seriously wrong. When an individual is raped, the advice is to
keep the specimens in a refrigerator, so how can it be that
during a hot spell last summer the refrigerator broke down and
there was no back-up plan? How can that be? What is the Home
Secretary going to do for every victim whose evidence was in that
refrigerator? What is the plan? Is it to go back to those
victims, apologise and explain what happens next?
The particular incident to which the hon. Lady refers is shocking
and unacceptable. It must not happen again. It is absolutely
clear that that is true.
Progress has been made. I have emphasised the importance that I
attach to VAWG and the investigation and prosecution of rape. It
is clear that police forces all around the country need to do
better. We are seeing progress on the timeliness of
investigations and the number of cases referred to the Crown
Prosecution Service for charge; there is an increase in the
number of independent sexual violence advisers and independent
domestic violence advisers, who significantly increase the
chances of a successful prosecution; and we have introduced
special measures so that victims of rape and serious sexual
offences can give evidence in a better way. There are many
measures, but I am clear that I am not going to rest until we
really succeed on this problem.
(Ashfield) (Con)
I met the Met police a few weeks back with the Home Affairs
Committee, and I was astounded to learn that officers who have
been there for over 20 years are now investigating a culture that
is well over 20 years old. Does my right hon. and learned Friend
think it would be a good idea for more independent people to come
into the Met force to investigate?
As Baroness Casey accepted, the vast majority of police officers
uphold the highest professional standards, and I pay tribute to
them for their everyday bravery in keeping Londoners safe. We
must make sure that the Met continues to attract the best and
brightest people from all walks of life so that they can bring
diversity, expertise, experience and skills to ensure that it is
the best force that we can have.
(Streatham) (Lab)
I represent a constituency in Lambeth, where trust in policing is
at the lowest level of anywhere in London. Instead of addressing
the abuses of existing police powers, the Government seem to be
creating new unaccountable powers. My constituency has sadly seen
the death of two young people at the hands of police officers in
the past two years alone, with the tragic murder of Sarah Everard
in March 2021 and the fatal shooting of Chris Kaba in September
2022. This report is not the first to highlight institutional
racism, sexism and homophobia, which the Home Secretary seems
unwilling to accept.
We have to undergo a security check, including police checks, to
work in this House. How hard is it to ensure that every single
officer is run through a similar check? Will the Home Secretary
commit today to doing that? I asked the new commissioner who is
responsible for suspending officers for misconduct, and he said
that, under the law, it is the Home Secretary’s responsibility.
In November 2022, a response from the Minister for Crime,
Policing and Fire said it was the commissioner’s responsibility.
The Home Secretary has said today that there are impediments and
that she could potentially change the law to make sure that this
happens. Can she please explain who is in charge and exactly what
is going on?
I have taken action by consulting on the disciplinary process.
Vetting standards are set by the College of Policing, via its
statutory code of practice and its authorised professional
practice guidance on vetting, to ensure that standards are
improved. I asked the inspectorate to conduct a rapid review of
all forces and their responses to the report’s findings. The
Policing Minister has led a lot of work with the College of
Policing to strengthen its statutory code of practice for police
vetting, making the obligations that all forces must legally
follow stricter and clearer. We are doing work in the Home
Office, but I am afraid that, ultimately, political
accountability lies with the Mayor of London.
(The Wrekin) (Con)
I note the Home Secretary’s support for the commissioner, but
could it be the case that the future of the Met hangs on one
word: “ambiguous”? Not “institutional” but “ambiguous”. Is there
anything ambiguous in either the findings, the recommendations or
the terminology that the Home Secretary has seen in the Casey
report?
Baroness Casey is clear that the vast majority of serving police
officers in the Met uphold the highest professional and cultural
standards. This report is not about them but about the
unambiguous systemic failings of culture, management and
accountability. I am very keen for us all to learn from this
diagnosis, from which reform must grow.
Dame (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op)
The Home Secretary is primarily responsible for the funding,
which has seesawed, the vetting, which she just touched on, and,
critically, the structure of the Metropolitan police. On the
latter point, she has talked about the need for reform. Can she
tell the House whether she has had any discussions about, or
whether she is even considering, breaking up the Metropolitan
police to take out counter-terrorism and leave a London police
force for Londoners?
Even Baroness Casey does not recommend breaking up the
Metropolitan police, so I do not support that proposal. The hon.
Lady mentions funding, so let me be clear that cash funding for
the Met has increased since 2010. The Met gets 57% more funding
per capita than the rest of England and Wales, and 24% more than
the next highest-funded force, Merseyside, which has a higher
level of crime. On all accounts, there is funding for the Met and
there should be no reason for a failure to improve.
(Barrow and Furness) (Con)
Baroness Casey’s review makes stark reading: “too little
humility”, “denial”, a culture of covering up problems and a lack
of emphasis on the issues that matter most to those the Met is
meant to serve. That is compounded by, in the report’s words,
“institutional racism, misogyny and homophobia”.
When the Home Affairs Committee has been to meet Sir Mark and his
team over recent months, it has been clear that they are working
hard to turn around this culture and to root out the officers at
the heart of doing so much harm to the public’s view of the
force, but the public can wait only so long for this turnaround
to happen. Can my right hon. and learned Friend confirm by what
time and what metrics she will be looking to see whether the
right reforms are taking root?
The new Met commissioner has been in place for only six months.
From the moment he was appointed, he has been clear and
unequivocal about the size of the challenge he faces and what it
will take to turn it around, which is why he set out in detail
his plan to restore trust and raise standards. He now needs all
our support to ensure he can achieve that plan as quickly as
possible.
(Brentford and Isleworth)
(Lab)
My hon. Friend the Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Dame
) specifically asked the Home Secretary about the
seesawing, as well as the inadequacy, of funding. The report has
a chapter on the inexperience of new officers. Does the Home
Secretary now regret her Government’s decision to cut 20,000
officers?
As I said earlier, the Met police has done well on recruitment
and now has a record number of police officers—higher than at any
time under a Labour Administration. The force has a record number
of police officers, thanks to this Government’s police uplift
programme and our resource to increase and improve frontline
policing.
(Thurrock) (Con)
I am sure the whole House wants to celebrate the contribution of
and thank all the women police officers who, we now learn, have
had to deal with daily abuse and sexism from their male
colleagues as they try to keep us safe. It is simply unacceptable
that such behaviour is normalised in a service that is supposed
to keep us safe.
If my right hon. and learned Friend is serious about tackling
violence against women and girls, it simply is not adequate to
come to this Dispatch Box and say it will take many years to fix
the problems in the Met. I ask her to reflect on that and to see
what more can be done within the Home Office to spread good
cultural practice throughout our police services, because these
issues are not restricted to the Met.
I agree with my hon. Friend that we need to make progress on
improving protection and results for victims of rape and serious
sexual offences, which is why we have instituted a programme of
reform on the investigation and prosecution of rape. I recently
announced the biggest ever package of measures on domestic abuse,
in terms of the powers and the funding available for victims.
This is a priority, which is why I added violence against women
and girls to the strategic policing requirement, meaning it is
now set out as a national threat, sending the message to chief
constables and forces across the country that this can no longer
be dismissed.
(Vauxhall)
(Lab/Co-op)
We have to pause for a minute and really think about the fact
that our national police service has been declared
institutionally racist, sexist and homophobic. I think about all
the victims in my Vauxhall constituency who continue to be let
down. We have to make this a real turning point.
I have raised with the Home Secretary and the Policing Minister
the fact that, over the years, the Met has let down a number of
young, vulnerable girls who are being exploited by gang members.
Because of the adultification of young black girls, they, and not
the gang members, are viewed as the criminals. We are talking
about girls as young as 12 years old being forced into sexual
exploitation, servitude and abuse. Instead of dealing with their
trauma, the police criminalise these young girls. Does the Home
Secretary agree that this should be a matter of shame for the Met
police? Will she work with me to look at how we can end this
exploitation?
The exploitation of women and girls is unacceptable, whether by
gangs or by individual perpetrators, or whether it is structural
misogyny, as we have read in Baroness Casey’s report. Policing
leaders need to do all they can to restore confidence among
communities and among women and girls. We need to ensure that
policing standards are increased, vetting is improved and
training is reformed, and that there is a more diverse leadership
pipeline. We need more women to come forward to take leadership
roles within the police so that we see change.
(Newbury) (Con)
Baroness Casey said that the Sarah Everard case should have been
responded to with the seriousness with which
“a plane falling out of the sky”
would be responded to in the aviation sector. Yet some of those
now responsible for implementing the fundamental reforms,
particularly to vetting and disciplinary procedures, have worked
for the Met police for years or even decades, as in the case of
the commissioner. Is my right hon. and learned Friend confident
that those already imbued with the structures and cultures of the
Metropolitan police have the leadership skills to deliver the
fundamental change that is now required?
My hon. Friend is right to say that we need to see change. Sir
Mark Rowley has been in post for six months and he is clear that
we need to see change. We have commissioned several independent
reports. Baroness Casey’s is one, but we also have the one from
Lady Angiolini—she is due to report on standards and culture.
These independent voices will be vital in effecting change, but
it is also clear that the independent scrutiny brought about by
the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime and the Mayor of London
will be critical in bringing about change.
(Islington North) (Ind)
Baroness Casey’s report makes it very clear that what campaigners
have been saying for years is absolutely true: black Londoners
are disproportionately likely to be stopped and searched by the
Metropolitan police. It also calls for fundamental change in that
whole policy. Will the Home Secretary explain how the Public
Order Bill, which gives the police increased powers of stop and
search during protests or demonstrations, fits with the
recommendations made by Baroness Casey? Will she also suspend the
operation of that section of the Public Order Bill until such
time as the police have been able to reform their ways on the
disproportionate stopping and searching of black Londoners?
As Baroness Casey makes clear, the majority of Londoners support
the appropriate use of stop and search. As Sir Mark has made
clear, stop and search is a vital tool in keeping Londoners safe
and saving lives; 350 to 400 knives are seized per month thanks
to stop and search. That is why I emphatically support the
appropriate use of stop and search as a way to keep everyone
safe.
(Cheadle) (Con)
Baroness Casey’s report makes harrowing reading. We see a police
force riddled with misogyny, racism and homophobia; and a place
where complainants or whistleblowers, rather than being listened
to, are turned on and mistreated, leading to a systemic fear of
speaking up. During the UK’s first Whistleblowing Awareness Week,
this report shines a light on the failure of organisations where
there is a culture of fear and cover-up. Shockingly, the report
makes the following clear:
“The culture of not speaking up has become so ingrained that even
when senior officers actively seek candid views, there is a
reluctance to speak up.”
Clearly, the Government, the Mayor and the Met leadership must
act on all of the report’s recommendations. However, may I add
another one of my own, by encouraging my right hon. and learned
Friend to consider how whistleblowing reform and an office of the
whistleblower could play a key part in eradicating toxic cultures
across all organisations?
My hon. Friend is right to highlight the need for reform of
misconduct procedures. There are measures to ensure that there is
transparency and rigour in the system, including the Independent
Office for Police Conduct. The Government have also introduced
other measures, including routinely holding misconduct hearings
in public and having independent legally qualified chairs to lead
misconduct hearings. But there is a vital need to ensure that
provision on dismissals and the process of rooting out
inappropriate officers is improved, which is why I have launched
a consultation to look at just that.
(Eltham) (Lab)
One of the first things I did as a newly elected MP in 1997 was
call for an independent inquiry into the investigation into the
murder of Stephen Lawrence. That became the Macpherson report of
1999, and it is a sad indictment that we are back here again with
the Metropolitan police being called institutionally racist.
People such as Carrick and Couzens are the tip of the iceberg. In
order for them to get away with what they got away with, hundreds
of other officers have had to turn a blind eye. That is an
indictment of the culture that exists within the Metropolitan
police and other police forces, and those who want to do the
right thing are held back because there is not a disciplinary
process to deal with the people who do bad things. So what is the
Home Secretary going to do, not just with the Met—do not blame
the Mayor—but about our national police force to ensure that a
proper disciplinary process is in place that allows the good
people to do their jobs properly?
What I am already doing is running a review of the dismissals
process. On the issues that the hon. Gentleman raises, this is
why the Met commissioner’s establishment of a new anti-corruption
and abuse command, with a wider and more proactive remit, is
absolutely essential. That will raise internal standards and
internal accountability, and it will facilitate and empower
people to come forward, challenge and report bad behaviour.
(Lewisham East) (Lab)
The Casey review is truly damning; there is institutional racism,
institutional misogyny and institutional homophobia in the Met.
On child protection, the review recommends creating a new
children’s strategy. Does the Home Secretary support that? If so,
what is the top issue on child protection and safeguarding that
she wants this strategy to address?
I was disturbed by Baroness Casey’s findings on the issues
relating to the work on public protection and safeguarding. That
is why that has been expressly dealt with in the turnaround plan
set out by the Met commissioner; there are key interventions to
invest in the safeguarding teams and achieve national best
practice standards. The police want to ensure that there is
better data and technology to target perpetrators and protect
victims. We want to ensure that there are positive criminal
justice outcomes for public protection cases and that
safeguarding and the people who work in it are properly
supported.
(Ilford South) (Lab)
I represent the most diverse constituency in the whole of the UK.
Over the past three years, we have faced stabbings and homicides
far too frequently. Recently, we have had the awful and avoidable
tragedy of the murder of Zara Aleena. Those in my local community
want to be able to trust the thin blue line to look after and
protect them. Unfortunately, as is set out in the Casey report
and in the conversations I have day to day in Ilford, it is clear
that people do believe that the Met police is institutionally
racist and institutionally misogynistic. I want to be able to go
back to them today having heard from the Home Secretary about
what she is going to do. I do not want her to pass the buck; I
want her to make sure that my constituents can trust the police;
that they will not be raped or murdered by people who are police
officers; that they can call 999 and know that help will be on
the way; and that they will be protected in the way that they
should be.
Baroness Casey is clear that the failings in relationships with
communities are serious. That is why it is paramount that public
trust in the Met is restored. I am going to continue to hold the
Met commissioner to account, as well as the Mayor of London,
because he has an important role to play here. But it is clear
that we need to ensure that the Met has the resources it needs,
which is why I am pleased that it now has the record number of
police officers in its history on the frontline, working to keep
Londoners safe. It has also made significant progress already in
achieving some of the stated goals in its turnaround plan.
(Walthamstow) (Lab/Co-op)
Recognising that the Met has been decreed to be institutionally
misogynistic, homophobic and racist is not just about a label; it
is about the lived experience of the communities that many of us
have served and worked in for generations, and the message we had
been trying to get across to the Home Secretary and her
predecessors, as well as the Met leadership, for many years. All
of us have a role to play in restoring confidence for our
communities, but the Home Secretary will know that as of today
there are still more than 100 serving officers in the Met being
investigated for sexual misconduct and domestic violence. She
could do something about that today. Let us be clear: if she
wants to bring forward emergency legislation to deal with the
issues stopping those officers being dismissed, she will have our
support. Will she do it?
I am very proud that a Conservative Government brought in
landmark legislation—the Domestic Abuse Act 2021—that, for the
first time, increased the powers relating to and the status and
seriousness of domestic abuse. We have announced our intention to
bring in legislation at the earliest opportunity to ensure that
offenders convicted of coercive and controlling behaviour are
automatically managed in the same way as violent offenders. We
have also run an important measure and are consulting on a lot of
investment to support victims of domestic abuse, and I am very
proud of this Government’s track record on empowering the police
to better support victims of domestic abuse.
(Westminster North) (Lab)
Neither the long-standing concerns about police culture
identified in the Casey report nor the individual instances of
racism, misogyny and homophobia in the police can be laid at the
door of the cuts to the police budget over the early part of the
last decade and the see-saw funding since then; that would allow
those responsible to escape that responsibility. However, does
the Home Secretary accept that the collapse of neighbourhood
policing, not just in London but across the country, has
fundamentally changed the relationship between the public and the
police? Will she ensure that the police across Britain—not just
in London—rebuild their neighbourhood policing? How will she hold
police forces to account in restoring that vital function?
I am very glad that the Met has an increased, record number of
police officers. Many of them will be deployed on the frontline
to neighbourhood policing teams, so we will have an increase in
response. The turnaround plan specifically addresses how the Met
will improve its neighbourhood policing response through better
powers and quicker responses from the response team, ensuring
that antisocial behaviour is dealt with. That is a priority for
both the Met and myself.
(Dulwich and West Norwood)
(Lab)
For many of my constituents, reading Baroness Casey’s report will
be the first time that their experiences of policing have been
validated and vindicated. The same cannot be said for the Home
Secretary’s response. It is hard to overstate the frustration and
betrayal that so many Londoners have felt when they have raised
concerns with the police and have been met with a stone wall of
defensiveness, excuses and denial. Among many, many issues that
Baroness Casey highlights are serious problems with transparency
and accountability. My experience in raising complaints about two
very serious matters of police conduct is that there is no
accountability because the IOPC will refer complaints back to the
Met to be investigated, and internal investigations simply cannot
deliver. What will the Home Secretary do to resolve the situation
in which the police mark their own homework and there is no
accountability or change?
As Baroness Casey’s report made clear, primary accountability
sits with the Mayor of London. It is for the Mayor, rather than
the inspectorate or any other body, to hold the commissioner
directly to account for taking the rigorous action needed to
address concerns. It was frankly shocking to read that the Mayor
has not chaired a board for several years. I am very glad that he
has now agreed to start discharging his role appropriately, but
it is clear that governance and accountability need to improve.
That is why that constituted a significant element of the
report.
(Putney) (Lab)
Putney constituents will find the report shocking but not
surprising in many ways. Cuts have consequences. A major culture
change is essential, but the Casey report lays out that the cuts
resulted in the culture problem increasing. The Home Secretary
said that funding for the force will be up to £3.3 billion, but
in 2011, the funding was £3.7 billion, so there is a real-terms
cash cut. Along the way, there has been £1 billion of cuts, and
the funding for the Met is now 18% lower in real terms than it
was in 2011, which is equivalent to 9,600 police officers. We see
in the report that police officers have been taken away from our
streets, that the number of senior police officers has been cut,
which reduces accountability, and that there were cuts to rape
investigation units. Does the Home Secretary accept her part in
that and in the report’s findings about national cuts? Will she
fund the reforms that are needed to win back trust?
In 2023-24, the Met police will receive up to £3.34 billion in
funding. That is an increase of up to £97.6 million on the
previous year and £177.8 million compared with 2010. The average
funding per head of population for the Metropolitan police is
higher than for any other force. In terms of funding, resources
and police numbers, which I mentioned, there is no reason why the
Met cannot succeed in turning this around.
(Glasgow North West)
(SNP)
The Casey review shines a damning light on racism, misogyny and
homophobia in the Met police, but that is not isolated. There are
other organisations where such behaviour goes unpunished. The
hon. Member for Wrexham () published her report on
the experiences of women in the armed forces, which was similarly
damning. What discussions has the Home Secretary had with Cabinet
colleagues about shining further light on major
organisations—such as the armed forces—in which the public should
have absolute trust?
I only have responsibility for the police. That is why earlier
this year, I asked for all forces to go through their data, wash
it and check for cases where police officers should not be
serving on the frontline or, indeed, in the force at all. Forces
are coming forward with that information and that will be a good
thing to ensure that the police force nationally rids itself of
those who are unfit to wear the badge.
(Leicester West) (Lab)
I thank for her report and service to
the country. Like her, I am fundamentally pro-policing and
appalled at the findings. To give an example, sexual offences
units kept rape kits in broken fridges next to lunchboxes, which
may have included swabs taken from victims—an absolutely
appalling thing to have to go through—and armed police units
wasted money on spurious kit such as night vision goggles and
camouflage clothes. My constituents will want to understand
whether there are wider implications. What assessment has the
Home Secretary made of the degree to which these appalling
failings are happening in other forces? What action will she take
to ensure that my constituents and those across the country get
the decent, safe policing that they deserve?
I expect every report of rape to be treated seriously from the
point of disclosure. Every victim needs to be treated with
dignity and every investigation needs to be conducted thoroughly
and professionally. The rape review took a hard and honest look
at how the entire criminal justice system deals with rape, and in
too many instances, it has not been good enough. That is why
there is a whole programme of work afoot—including Operation
Soteria, of which I am a big supporter—to improve the
investigation of rape, reduce the time that it takes to get a
prosecution going, and, ultimately, to improve outcomes for
victims of rape.
(North East Fife)
(LD)
As a former police officer, I would like to say that I was
shocked to read Baroness Casey’s excellent report, but to be
honest, I am pretty inured by now to some of what we have heard.
I will make two points. First, in my view, the most important
rank in the police service, particularly if we want to change the
culture, is police sergeant, but the report told us that the
training for police sergeants amounted to a 23-slide PowerPoint.
Will the Home Secretary task the College of Policing to ensure,
and make an assessment, that that is not the case in other
forces, and to directly support the Met in that regard? Secondly,
as a Scottish MP—not a police officer any more—let me say that
the Met’s performance impacts my constituents, too, through its
national priorities. The Casey report said that it did not
recommend dismantling the Met at this point but that that may be
recommended in future. How will that assessment be made and who
will make that decision?
The hon. Lady is right to talk about leadership training; that is
why I work closely with the College of Policing to ensure we have
a better programme of preparation for the next generation of
police leaders. That must start early on in a policing career.
The existing training is frankly not good enough, and that is why
there will be a programme of reform announced soon.
(Warrington North)
(Lab)
Among the most harrowing parts of Baroness Casey’s report, she
quotes a serving police officer who says of rape,
“you may as well say it’s legal in London.”
However, that is not just an issue for London or the Metropolitan
Police. This Government have allowed the national charge rate for
rape to drop to an abysmal, historic low of 1.6%. Does the Home
Secretary accept that this is a national problem, and that it is
her responsibility to fix it so that victims can expect justice
from our justice system?
It is exactly because we accept that there have been problems
with the investigation and prosecution of rape that the
Government commissioned the end-to-end rape review, which looked
rigorously at how we can improve the investigation and
prosecution of rape. The Metropolitan police is part of Operation
Soteria, a pioneering new way of delivering better outcomes for
victims. In the last year, the number of charges for adult rape
offences increased by 79%. That is progress and movement in the
right direction, and we need to ensure that it continues.
(Dwyfor Meirionnydd)
(PC)
The Casey review’s conclusion that the Met is institutionally
broken is damning, but this is not just about the Met. Looked at
from Wales, the Westminster model of policing is failing. If we
want policing in Wales to reflect the values of the people of
Wales, strategy and scrutiny must be made in Wales. When will the
Home Secretary acknowledge that reality and devolve policing to
our Parliament?
I do not support devolving policing to Wales. We have a national
oversight role for all forces in England and Wales, and I am very
glad that the forces in Wales have responded well to my call for
all chiefs to look at their data and vetting and to improve their
vetting standards.
(Hemsworth) (Lab)
A mature woman constituent who came to see me had been abused as
a child by her father. The police simply did not address the
matter for years and years until, through that struggle, we
eventually managed to get a prosecution and the father ended up
in jail. He is still there now. This is not simply a problem of
the Met. What is the Home Secretary doing? Is it not reckless to
hand over new police powers, such as stop and search, without
suspicion of any crime being committed, to a racist, homophobic
and misogynist police force? What guarantee can she give that
those very police officers who are not acceptable will not use
those powers to pursue their evil ways?
On improving standards, I have launched a review of the
dismissals process. We wait for that to conclude, and on the back
of that we will take action, legislative if necessary, to change
the standards and the process by which chief constables and
senior leaders in policing apply those standards in recruitment.
It is important that we look at the evidence from that
consultation, and we will be announcing measures in due
course.
(Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath)
(Alba)
Institutional racism, misogyny and homophobia are bad enough, but
the deliberate operational decision to deprioritise women’s
safety and child protection is serious and unforgivable. I asked
the Home Secretary about safeguarding in response to her
statement on David Carrick, and on 9 February I wrote to the
Prime Minister asking him to look at establishing an independent
safeguarding regulator, because this is a much bigger problem
than the police. We have policy capture by proponents of queer
theory that undermines the very activities that are of concern:
women’s safety and child protection. Is it not time that we had
an independent regulator that, as the hon. Member for Glasgow
North West () suggested, can tackle
those problems across all public bodies?
It is precisely because I take violence against women and girls
seriously that I added it to the strategic policing requirement,
so that it is set out as a national threat for forces to respond
to alongside the other threats listed there. I am very proud of
the range of tools and powers that the Government have
introduced, such as stalking prevention orders, sexual harm and
sexual risk orders, and forced marriage and female genital
mutilation protection orders—a whole range of legislative
measures that are empowering the police to respond more robustly
to victims of abuse and domestic abuse.
(Gower) (Lab)
Baroness Casey’s finding of a “boys’ club” is sadly not a
surprise to many of us—and let us not pretend that that culture
is purely confined to WhatsApp groups in the Metropolitan Police.
The report has shown the urgent need for action to make policing
and police forces more transparent. When public trust in policing
is at its lowest, it is unfathomable that serving police officers
are not obliged to declare their affiliations with and
memberships of societies such as the Freemasons. I urge the Home
Secretary to bring in legislation to address that lack of
transparency.
Vetting standards are set by the College of Policing via its
statutory code of practice on vetting, and the inspectorate has
looked in depth at whether those standards are being properly
applied. We are strengthening the statutory code of practice for
police vetting and making the vetting obligations on all forces
stricter and clearer. That is action that we are taking, but of
course we need chief constables to take the requisite action at
their end.
(Swansea West)
(Lab/Co-op)
Baroness Casey’s report underlines the fact that the Met is
systematically dysfunctional and discriminatory. That is
manifested on a day-to-day basis when women and minority officers
seek support in their workplace and are simply bullied and
intimidated. When they complain, gangs of sergeants troop up to
ridicule, abuse and coercively control them. Will the Home
Secretary change that by introducing civilian management
resources and independent accountability to empower and empathise
with women and minority officers, with a view to increasing
performance, welfare and retention in place of misogyny, racism
and homophobia? Then we can get rid of the toxicity and have
forces that we can all be proud of, both in the Met and across
the land.
Baroness Casey’s review makes clear that there is a need for some
regulatory change. We are currently undertaking a review of the
process for police officer dismissals, due to conclude in May,
which will cover some of those issues, but we need to consider
all the outcomes of the review before determining next steps.
(Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement. Baroness
Casey’s report is not simply uncomfortable, but devastating in
the detail and the extent of problems and difficulties. It seems
clear that nothing short of a complete overhaul of the force will
engender the restoration of public trust. However, does the
Secretary of State agree that the thousands of good Met officers
cannot be tarred with the same brush? What steps will she take to
support those members of staff and ensure they do not face unfair
accusations at this time?
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to pay tribute to the vast
majority of serving police officers in the Met and throughout the
country who do a good job, who are honest, decent and brave and
who uphold the highest standards. Many of us will never see the
crime prevented, the victims protected or the justice secured
thanks to their everyday bravery. It is to that majority of
officers that I appeal for their commitment. We cannot change
this situation without them. They are part of the solution, and
they need to step up and step forward if that much-needed change
is to happen. We need to back the leadership and our brave police
officers so that together we can create a Met that is fit for
purpose.
Mr Deputy Speaker ( )
Finally, I call Mr .
(Denton and Reddish)
(Lab)
The Casey review is damning and makes difficult reading for those
of us who support the police and the concept of policing by
consent. Of course, these issues are pertinent not just to the
Metropolitan police but to police forces across the country. I
was reassured to receive an email today from Chief Superintendent
John Webster, the district commander for Stockport in Greater
Manchester police, in which he said:
“I’m sure you’ll agree with me that there will be some parallels
that we can draw from this report. On standards of professional
behaviour, it goes without saying that these are non-negotiable,
and as your District Commander, it is important for you to know
that I will never bend outside of our rules. I expect you all to
have the same view.”
What is the Home Secretary doing to ensure that the words of
Chief Superintendent Webster are communicated not just to his
police officers in the Stockport division, but to police officers
across the whole country?
If that is the last question, perhaps it is inspiring for us to
end this session with reference to Greater Manchester police,
because under the powerful leadership of Chief Constable Stephen
Watson, that force has turned around. In a relatively short time,
it has gone from being a failing force with severe, chronic and
systemic problems to a force that is succeeding and winning in
the fight against crime. That is thanks in large part to the
strong leadership of Stephen Watson, upholding the highest
standards, holding his officers to account and ensuring that the
needs of the public come first and foremost in policing. That is
a great example of what is possible for the Met.
|
