Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con) I beg to move, That this House
has considered the matter of human trafficking and modern slavery.
I am grateful to Mr Speaker for rescheduling this debate.
Unfortunately, I had flu when it was first scheduled; I am not
entirely sure I am over it, so I might croak my way through my
speech. It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr
Betts. I thank the Under-Secretary of State for the Home
Department, my hon....Request free
trial
(Wellingborough) (Con)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the matter of human trafficking
and modern slavery.
I am grateful to Mr Speaker for rescheduling this debate.
Unfortunately, I had flu when it was first scheduled; I am not
entirely sure I am over it, so I might croak my way through my
speech. It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairmanship,
Mr Betts.
I thank the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, my
hon. Friend the Member for Derbyshire Dales (Miss Dines), for
appearing today to respond to this important and timely debate,
and I also thank the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Halifax
(), and the SNP spokesman, the
hon. Member for Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East
(), for being here. I
thank my exceptionally talented senior parliamentary assistant,
Isobelle Jackson, for the preparation of this speech; my
parliamentary assistant, Jack Goodenough, for his assistance; and
Tatiana Gren-Jardan, the head of the modern slavery unit at the
Centre for Social Justice and at Justice and Care, who has helped
me a lot with the research for this debate and over many years on
the issue of human trafficking. I know that they will be watching
this debate closely.
When I was first elected a Member of Parliament in 2005, I had a
letter posted to my constituency office. It was anonymous, but
the person who wrote it was a prostitute from Northampton. She
was very concerned about what was happening to young women who
were being brought into this country and forced into prostitution
in Northamptonshire. That was the first time I had come across
human trafficking, and from that moment on, I began to campaign
on the issue. I have served as the chairman of the all-party
parliamentary group on human trafficking, and I am the chairman
of the parliamentary advisory group on modern slavery and the
supply chain. Given that the House is considering a Bill that
will affect provisions of the Modern Slavery Act 2015, this
debate could not be more relevant. Having said that, its purpose
is not to scrutinise the Illegal Migration Bill; it is about the
crime of human trafficking.
In debates concerning small boat crossings or modern slavery
laws, I often hear the terms “human trafficking” and “people
smuggling” used interchangeably. In fact, each has a distinct
meaning, and the language we use when describing these criminal
activities matters. I sometimes throw things at the TV when I
hear Ministers using the wrong terminology. Let us get this
sorted out. According to the United Nations, migrant smuggling
is
“the facilitation, for financial or other material gain, of
irregular entry into a country where the migrant is not a
national or resident.”
The people being smuggled have willingly paid smugglers—often
large sums of money—to help them enter a chosen country. In so
far as a country can be defined as a victim of crime, the victims
of smuggling are the countries where the borders have been
breached.
On the other hand, human trafficking is defined as
“the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt
of people through force, fraud or deception, with the aim of
exploiting them for profit.”
Victims of human trafficking are individuals who are coerced into
being exploited in the most horrendous conditions. They often
arrive in the UK legally, with valid visas and passports.
However, the largest group of people referred to the national
referral mechanism are British nationals. Some 80% of the British
nationals referred are children exploited for criminal, labour
and sexual purposes in their own country, and one in
five—3,337—of the potential victims found in the UK last year was
a British child.
The national referral mechanism is the Government’s mechanism for
supporting the victims of human trafficking. When I started to
campaign on the issue of human trafficking, alongside , the former Member for
Totnes, human trafficking was not recognised as a crime in this
country. It was not even recognised as happening. has gone on to set up the
Human Trafficking Foundation, which serves as a secretariat for
the APPG. It was a pleasure to meet up with Anthony last week. He
almost single-handedly brought the issue of human trafficking to
the attention of this Parliament, and we are greatly indebted to
him for that. He is an absolute star. Some of the things he used
to get up to even I would blush at. He would somehow talk his way
into a Romanian prison to speak to traffickers—just amazing.
During my time as chairman, the all-party parliamentary group on
human trafficking and modern slavery travelled to Europe and
further afield to understand and learn from existing frameworks
relating to modern slavery. The group visited Europol so as to
understand the international approach to identifying traffickers,
and we met with the Dutch rapporteur, who was a former judge.
National rapporteurs are an initiative originating in the Council
of Europe, under which Governments are encouraged to appoint an
independent rapporteur to report on the Government’s actions
against human trafficking. In the case of the Dutch rapporteur,
once the office was established, it was recognised that she had
helped the Government, because she did not just criticise; she
promoted the good things that were being done.
When I started campaigning for a national rapporteur in this
country, we had to overcome two problems. First, the name clearly
sounded too French, so there was no way I could recommend that,
but that was easy to fix. We changed the name to independent
commissioner —job done. The second problem was much more
difficult. It was to explain to the Home Office that it needed to
do this. The Home Office resisted.
Initially, the Home Office created what it considered to be an
equivalent to a rapporteur, an interdepartmental ministerial
group. Sir Humphrey would have been proud. The group proved
largely ineffective and met infrequently, normally with a large
number of ministerial absences. Eventually, however, pressure
from the APPG forced the Government to appoint an Independent
Anti-Slavery Commissioner, and the Modern Slavery Act 2015
imposed a duty on the Home Secretary to make such an appointment.
The first commissioner was Kevin Hyland. He was replaced by Dame
Sara Thornton, who was appointed in May 2019. She left in April
2022. Since then, there has been no Independent Anti-Slavery
Commissioner. At the same time, suspected cases of human
trafficking have hit an all-time high, and Parliament is
scrutinising the Illegal Migration Bill, which clearly has
implications for human trafficking.
(South West Bedfordshire)
(Con)
My hon. Friend is making a fantastic speech on important issues.
I wonder whether I might lift his gaze to the global situation.
The International Labour Organisation estimates that there are 50
million people in modern slavery, a large number of whom are in
south and south-east Asia and involved in textiles, construction
and fishing. Many of them will never leave, for example, the same
brick kiln. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is incumbent on the
UK Government to challenge Governments in the countries concerned
to look at what is happening, and to challenge businesses here to
ensure that goods produced in this way do not end up in UK supply
chains? Does he agree that we all have a role to play in that
important work?
Mr Bone
My hon. Friend raises an important factor, and there are more
slaves in the world now than in Wilberforce’s day. That is an
issue that Parliament is looking at in particular, so as to
ensure that nobody in the supply chains for this Parliament is a
slave. However, a year or so ago, we did find a product that was
produced by slaves, so it is important that we use our soft
power. If I were spending our overseas aid budget, that is where
I would put a lot of the money, because there would be real
benefit for everyone involved.
Does my hon. Friend agree that that story had a good ending? We
went back to that business in Malaysia, and the conditions for
the workers are now improved. We effected real-world change for
the better, and we should count that as a positive result.
Mr Bone
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. If we discover something in
this House, as he says, we correct it. We do not just say, “We
are not going to use that product.” We go back and improve the
situation, which is entirely the right approach.
It is not good enough that we do not have an Independent
Anti-Slavery Commissioner. The only conclusion that people can
draw is that the Home Office does not want independent scrutiny
of human trafficking. I cannot see any other reason for it. In
2022, almost 17,000 potential victims of human trafficking were
referred to the national referral mechanism—an increase of 33% on
the previous year. Last year, the average number of days that a
victim waited for a conclusive grounds decision was 543. That is
an improvement on the previous year, when it was 560-odd days. In
about 100 years’ time, we will probably get it down to an
acceptable level. We are creating a huge backlog in the system
and stretching the resources available to support survivors of
human trafficking.
In last year’s Queen’s Speech, the Government promised a new
modern slavery Bill. In addition, a new modern slavery strategy
had been promised in spring 2021. That was in response to the
2019 independent review of the Modern Slavery Act 2015, which
suggested improvements. To date, neither the Bill nor the
strategy has been forthcoming. The independent review had four
main topics of focus, one of which was the safeguarding of child
victims of modern slavery. That issue has long been a source of
personal frustration to me.
As I have said, almost 80% of UK nationals referred to the NRM
are children. The situation regarding the safeguarding of
children who may have been trafficked is unique, in that the
provision of care for trafficked adults is far better than that
for trafficked children. Where else in Government do we look
after adults better than children? I made that point during my
Westminster Hall debate over 10 years ago. I recounted how in
2010 I went to a safe home in the Philippines, where there were
children who had been trafficked and had experienced the worst
kind of abuse—in the Philippines it was largely prostitution.
They received specialist support and went to school. They were in
a safe environment, and after a few years, they left a changed
person. In fact, I had the great pleasure of attending a wedding
of a former trafficked child who had gone through that process.
There is no reason why this country could not offer the same
standard of care. We should learn from best practice elsewhere,
and could offer more specialist support and rehabilitation to
trafficked children in this country.
(Rotherham) (Lab)
I thank the hon. Gentleman for securing this debate and for
everything that he is saying, which I reinforce. I had a meeting
with the International Justice Mission a couple of weeks ago,
which has been working in India for 20 years. It has created
child advocates—effectively magistrates. When they find a
trafficked child, they go into the care of the advocacy group,
which makes sure that all the support services, police and
justice services do their duty by that child. Does he agree that
that is a really useful model that we could learn from?
Mr Bone
I will talk a little about that, and what the Government are
doing for children. Unfortunately, it is not working. I will come
to that.
In this country, child victims of trafficking are treated
similarly to any other at-risk child, and are under the primary
care of local authorities. That often means that they are placed
in care with non-trafficked children, where security and staff
observation is limited. They are supposed to have an independent
child trafficking guardian. That does not work, and still does
not apply in all areas of the country. I say it does not work; I
will explain further a little later, but too many of the children
disappear and are re-trafficked. They go missing from local
authority care. That does not happen under the system for looking
after adult victims of trafficking. In 2020, Every Child
Protected Against Trafficking UK, which originally provided the
secretariat to the APPG on human trafficking and modern slavery,
found that one third of trafficked children go missing from local
authority care. The average number of “missing” episodes per
child was eight—significantly higher than for other children in
local authority care.
I am describing a system where a child who has been subject to
trafficking and horrific child abuse is put into a children’s
home with other non-trafficked children and has no increased
security. The child abusers can locate the child and traffic them
all over again. The criminal gangs have got even smarter: if
there is good access to the home, they bring it into their
business model. They leave the children in the children’s
home—that is free accommodation and food—and take them away on
demand to be used as prostitutes. Then they return them to the
home. How can that possibly, in any way, be right? In effect,
local government is inadvertently becoming a partner of the human
trafficking business. That is frankly a scandalous failure in our
duty of care to some of the most vulnerable people in our
society.
By contrast, when it comes to adults, the Salvation Army has been
the prime contractor for what is apparently called the
Government’s modern slavery victim care contract for the last 11
years. When that started, the Salvation Army became the
overarching body in charge. The trick that the Government
did—this is a great credit to them—was not to give the money to
the Salvation Army to spend, but to ensure that it worked with
partners across the UK, including groups interested in looking
after victims of human trafficking and, quite often, faith
groups. That added value produced a really successful way of
looking after adult victims of human trafficking. They get
support with accommodation, translation services, financial
subsistence, and transport, as well as bespoke support based on
victims’ needs, which is administered by the Salvation Army and
its partners. Without doubt, we look after adult victims better
than child victims.
It is absolutely crucial that we give world-leading care to both
adult and child victims, both from a compassionate perspective,
and to prevent re-trafficking and encourage survivors to help
bring the evil criminals to justice. The charity Justice and Care
has pioneered the introduction of victim navigators. Importantly,
victim navigators are independent of but integrated with police
officers working on modern slavery cases. Victim navigators have
access to the relevant police systems and can share information
with victims, which builds trust and frees up police time. Victim
navigators take on the responsibilities related to survivor
support, meeting survivors’ needs and keeping them updated on the
criminal investigation. The navigators have helped to safely
repatriate 32 survivors to 17 different countries, and find local
contacts in those countries that can continue to provide
support.
Justice and Care victim navigators benefit from the relationship
and partnership with the police but retain their independence,
giving survivors a more assessable ally at the point of rescue.
This work has been extraordinarily successful: 92% of victims
supported by a navigator were willing to engage on some level
with police, and victims who had access to the services of
navigators were five times more likely to engage in supporting a
prosecution than were victims in a sample of
non-navigator-supported cases. Hon. Members should not take my
word for it. One survivor said:
“He’s done everything for me. Every bit of support I’ve needed.
If it weren’t for”
the navigator,
“I would have been lost honestly…If I didn’t have”
the navigator,
“I wouldn’t have gone through with the case. I wouldn’t have had
the strength I had to do it…I couldn’t have done it without
him.”
An awful lot of people—from the left, I have to say—want to look
after the victims of human trafficking, and that is an honourable
thing to do. Having a right-wing chairman was a problem for the
left-wing members of the all-party group, but I said to them:
“Let’s stop people being victims. I would rather stop them
becoming victims than look after them after they have gone
through huge abuse.” One way of doing that is prosecuting these
evil criminal gangs. The victim navigator service was
independently evaluated between September 2018 and June 2022 and
was found to be so successful that the independent evaluators
recommended that it be rolled out nationwide.
In 2021, there were 93 prosecutions and 33 convictions for modern
slavery offences, as a principal offence, under the Modern
Slavery Act. On an all-offence basis, including where modern
slavery charges are brought alongside more serious charges, there
were 342 prosecutions and 114 convictions. Hon. Members might say
that that is good, but it is actually shockingly poor. There were
9,661 recorded modern slavery crimes in 2021-22; in fact, the
National Crime Agency estimates that between 6,000 and 8,000
offenders are involved in modern slavery crimes in the UK. Victim
navigators will clearly help to increase the prosecution rate,
but modern slavery is currently a low-risk, high-reward crime,
and low prosecutions are not the only indicator of that.
Analysing sentencing is crucial to understanding the outcomes for
modern slavery offenders. In 2021, fewer than one third of
offenders with modern slavery as a principal offence received a
custodial sentence of four years or more. In the past five years,
no offender with modern slavery as a principal offence has
received a life sentence, and only one has received a sentence of
more than 15 years. The average custodial sentence for modern
slavery offences in 2021 was four years and one month. That is
less than half that recorded for rape, yet the young women forced
into brothels as victims of human trafficking are, effectively,
repeatedly raped. On a sentence of four years and one month, the
person will probably be out within two years. If we do not get
serious about prosecuting, the police can break up more modern
slavery networks, which they are very good at, and the victim
navigators can support victims properly to bring the case to
trial, but their hard work will be undermined by poor
prosecutions.
I said that this debate is not about the Illegal Migration Bill,
but I hope you will forgive me for going back on that a bit, Mr
Betts. Without getting too entrenched in a discussion of the
Bill, I must say that I fully support the Government’s ambition
to end the small boats crisis. That is the No. 1 issue for my
constituents in Wellingborough, and it is absolutely vital that
we stop the boats. Although I established a clear distinction
between people smuggling and human trafficking, there are some
things that unite them. Those running both evil trades regard
people entirely as commodities; they care nothing for the lives
they destroy or endanger.
Returning those who have been illegally smuggled into the UK to
their country of origin or a safe third country is essential to
dismantling the business model of the evil people smugglers.
However, in doing that, we must be careful that we do not
undermine protections for genuine victims. Victims of modern
slavery who are rescued from abuse in this country must have the
security that they will not face deportation as a consequence of
coming forward. Many foreign nationals rescued from modern
slavery in the UK want to return to their country of origin and
familiar support networks, and have done so, and that is fine;
they should be supported in doing that. However, the threat of
deportation may undermine efforts to bring about prosecutions, by
deterring victims from coming forward.
Some survivors’ immigration status may have become irregular
while they were under the control of traffickers, perhaps due to
a visa expiring. Others may have arrived in the country
illegally, and their abusers may use the threat of deportation to
continue to exert control over them. The Illegal Migration Bill
needs to make a distinction between those who are identified on
arrival at the UK as having been trafficked, and those who are
identified as such later. We must not do anything that stops
support being given to those who have been moved to the UK and
suffered abuse, who have clearly been trafficked.
The Nationality and Borders Act 2022 established temporary leave
to remain for confirmed victims of human trafficking, as is
absolutely right. That should not be, effectively, overridden by
the Illegal Migration Bill, and I hope the Minister can reassure
me on that point—my right hon. Friends the Members for Maidenhead
(Mrs May) and for Chingford and Woodford Green ( ) raised similar concerns
yesterday in Committee on the Bill. Will the Minister be so good
as to meet me and other concerned Members before the Bill’s
Report and Third Reading?
Finally, I thank the Government for the Modern Slavery Act 2015
and all the things we have done to protect victims of human
trafficking. We lead Europe in this regard, and that is
fantastic. I just want to ensure that that continues and that we
do not move backwards in any way.
Several hon. Members rose—
(in the Chair)
Four Members wish to speak, and we have 30 minutes, so if hon.
Members could divide that into seven and a half minutes each, and
stick to that, it would be really appreciated. I call .
9.57am
(Rotherham) (Lab)
May I put on record my deep thanks to the hon. Member for
Wellingborough (Mr Bone)? He has championed this cause for years,
when many others really did not want to. We are talking about a
dirty and disgusting business—and it is a business. I am grateful
for all that he has done and continues to do to put the profile
of this awful crime exactly where it needs to be.
I rise to raise my concerns about the Government’s current
approach to tackling modern slavery and human trafficking,
particularly through the so-called Illegal Migration Bill;
regrettably, it completed its Committee stage yesterday, which
makes today’s debate timely. I could have chosen so many topics.
The hon. Member spoke about prostituted women; I completely agree
that we have to stop the pull factor, which is the fact that it
is still legal to buy sex in this country. I could have spoken
about child sexual exploitation, which unfortunately I know far
too much about, or child criminal exploitation. The hon. Member
for South West Bedfordshire () spoke a little about child
labour in the supply chain, and children working at brick kilns.
I was in Nepal with the International Development Committee a
couple of weeks ago, and we met those very children. I am really
proud that some of our foreign aid goes on supporting those
children and letting them know their rights, and, most
importantly, on working with the employers, because it tends to
be small businesses that still use children in modern slavery.
Our aid goes on educating employers and encouraging them to
change their practices.
However, let me focus on the UK. Many professionals are troubled
by the Government’s rhetoric, as well as the Illegal Migration
Bill, which conflates modern slavery with migration, asylum and
smuggling. The International Justice Mission states that
conflating those issues risks hindering efforts to assist
survivors and ensure traffickers are held to account. It only
makes this problem worse.
I was very proud in 2015, when the UK was genuinely a world
leader in tackling modern slavery, with the unprecedented Modern
Slavery Act. I was on the Bill Committee, and it was genuinely
world-changing. People came from all over the world to see what
we were doing, although the hon. Member for Wellingborough is
right that children were always an omission and not supported
properly.
That pride feels light years away from where we are today. The
measures in the Illegal Migration Bill, particularly in relation
to modern slavery survivors, are deeply disturbing, cruel and
lacking in compassion and common sense. I cannot imagine how
terrifying it must be to be trafficked to this county against
one’s will, as well as, in many cases, being a victim of sexual
exploitation or modern slavery.
We must remember that modern slavery and trafficking also happen
in the UK. I referred to child exploitation: in Rotherham, the
police innovatively used trafficking legislation, because it says
that moving a person from one side of the street to the other is
trafficking. We have strong legislation in place for that; it is
just not being enforced as often as it should be, and nor is the
national referral mechanism. I was disappointed in the early days
of that scheme that many local authorities were not referring
local people into that support network.
The Government now want to refuse vulnerable people vital
protections that we put into law less than eight years ago. The
Illegal Migration Bill would disqualify victims of trafficking
and modern slavery from protections under the national referral
mechanism and deny crucial support to those who arrived in the UK
through irregular means, allowing them to be removed entirely
from this country. That includes child victims of trafficking
whose family members meet those conditions.
Almost 90% of modern slavery claims are found to be valid,
meaning that these new provisions will remove support from
genuine victims who need our help. The reality is that this will
not prevent traffickers, and it certainly will not help victims
of modern slavery. I am especially worried about the impact that
this will have on victims and survivors of sexual and
gender-based violence. Researchers at the University of
Birmingham found that survivors are unlikely to report crimes of
sexual and gender-based violence or trafficking, without legal
protections or safe reporting mechanisms that protect them from
immigration exposure.
If the Government really want to stop the boats, they must first
protect victims and survivors of trafficking, slavery and sexual
exploitation, to end the traffickers’ business model. Instead,
this Bill will punish only the victims. Case studies from the
University of Birmingham’s SEREDA project demonstrate why
survivors of sexual violence, in particular, must be exempt from
removal to other so-called safe countries.
Samiah fled Algeria after being raped by an influential man in
the Algerian army and, facing pressure from her family, married
her rapist. Her sister sold her jewellery to pay for Samiah’s
passage to safety. Samiah passed through France on the way to the
UK but, given the large Algerian population there, and the threat
from both her family and the man who attacked her, she did not
feel France was safe enough to offer her protection.
When she arrived in the UK, she had no idea of her rights, and
slept rough in Victoria station. She was befriended by a man who
gave her alcohol for the first time in her life, and she was
raped again, becoming pregnant. She was taken in by a stranger,
who helped her find a lawyer, and told she should put in a claim
for asylum. Samiah’s case illustrates why it is vital that
victims of sexual and gender-based violence must have access to
support, no matter how they arrive here. Not all forced migrants
feel safe in the first safe country they pass through. The
vulnerability of survivors of sexual and gender-based violence
will be preyed on even more without the relative protections of
the asylum and national referral mechanisms.
The previous Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner warned
repeatedly that denying trafficking victims support makes it
harder, not easier, to catch criminal traffickers. Why will the
Minister not listen to experts, and protect the victims, rather
than the traffickers? Such vast changes to our modern slavery
policy should not take place at a time when the UK’s new
anti-slavery commissioner has not been appointed. With the role
remaining vacant for almost a year, it is deeply concerning that
we have lost an independent voice, expert insight and essential
scrutiny of the UK’s approach to tackling modern slavery and
human trafficking.
Will the Minister confirm in her response when the new
Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner will be appointed? Will the
Home Office commit to consult the new commissioner before pushing
ahead with these new measures? I am proud that Labour voted
against some of the measures in the Bill, because we are on the
side of the victims. I am one of those people from the left who
want to support victims, but I am also one of those people from
the left who want to stop the business model of these traffickers
and modern slavery owners. We have to do all we can, in a united
way, to make that happen.
10.05am
(Witham) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Betts. I
thank all Members here today, and particularly my hon. Friend the
Member for Wellingborough (Mr Bone), who is such a stalwart
campaigner and a champion of everything to do with tackling human
trafficking. I remember the day he was elected as chair of the
APPG, and his reaction, and the comments he has made today about
someone with right-wing political views working with others, show
that there really is no political divide on this issue. We are
here to build bridges, and there is so much collective experience
in this room in terms of people who have fought for the
victims.
The debate is timely. We have heard reference to the Illegal
Migration Bill, and today we will also see the introduction of
the Victims and Prisoners Bill in Parliament. I have been
campaigning for a victims Bill for many years, and I stand
alongside those who have stood up, compassionately, for decades,
for victims of the most appalling and abhorrent crimes. My hon.
Friend made an outstanding speech and unpacked many of the
complex issues associated with human trafficking, some of which
are often conflated.
Our priority must always be the victims. My remarks will focus on
dismantling human trafficking criminal networks, tackling
modern-day slavery and supporting victims. Some of these matters
touch on my time in Government, most recently in the Home Office,
but also in International Development. Many colleagues will know
some of the work we have collectively done and what we have
achieved in the past.
Taking action on human trafficking and modern-day slavery
requires continued focus, both at home, which is incredibly
important, and abroad. As has been noted in the debate, there is
ongoing legislation in this House, and future legislation coming.
This is both a domestic and an international issue.
(Thurrock) (Con)
Does my right hon. Friend share my concern that the fact that
modern slavery has become part of the debate on the Illegal
Migration Bill, which is before the House, means that we are
forgetting some of the most vulnerable victims in our society
right now? I particularly highlight the cuckooing of people with
learning disabilities, who are perhaps the most discriminated
community in our society. If we let the debate continue to be
seen through the prism of migration, we will be letting down the
most vulnerable.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. If I may, Mr Betts, I would
reflect on the fact that, when I was Home Secretary, we saw the
most appalling act of people trafficking, in a lorry in my hon.
Friend’s constituency; that was the Purfleet incident, and 39
individuals—victims—passed away. It was one of the most horrific
incidents, but we have had strong criminal prosecutions, and
other work has taken place. I will come to that in a minute.
On my hon. Friend’s point, cuckooing, children being exploited
through drug gangs, and other vulnerable people have dominated
much of my work over three and a half years. There is a
fundamental link here: criminal gangs showing contempt and
disregard for human life and dignity. This is a big tragedy,
which we are all here discussing today.
The latest figures from the ILO estimate that in 2021, 28 million
people worldwide were forced into labour and 22 million were
forced into marriages. These issues are more prevalent than ever
today, despite the fact that we think the world and society have
moved on and there is greater awareness. That 50 million is more
than the population of Spain, so we should just think about the
scale of the challenge we face. The ILO also estimated that that
number had increased by 10 million between 2016 and 2021. That
demonstrates the nature of the criminality, which my hon. Friend
touched on, and that is why we have to be relentless.
I recognise the Home Office footprint in this as well. We do need
an anti-slavery commissioner; there are reasons why that was
delayed last year, which are mainly down to the changes in
Government that took place more than once. In reality, however,
this should be a whole-of-Government effort. That is why my right
hon. Friend the Member for Maidenhead (Mrs May), who deserves
every credit and tribute for the work she led on securing the
Modern Slavery Act 2015, was fundamental in this area because she
recognised that. During my time in the Department for
International Development, we worked internationally on this
matter, and I had the privilege of working with my right hon.
Friend when she was Prime Minister to develop that call to action
to end forced labour, modern slavery and human trafficking. Under
her leadership, that went straight to the United Nations General
Assembly in 2017, and its impact was significant. It was a major
moment for the United Kingdom and one we should be proud of. It
brought together 37 countries to introduce commitments to
strengthen law enforcement activity, galvanise international
co-operation and support victims. We rightly funded that and put
aid into that. That investment helped tackle modern-day slavery
upstream in transit countries, tackling trafficking at the
source. It absolutely shows how development assistance safeguards
people and safeguards people’s lives. Over recent years, because
this is no longer integrated in the way it once was, we have gone
backwards and, with that, our international standing on this
issue has also regressed. Sadly, I do think this is right.
There are many issues around illegal migration that rightly need
to be tackled, and the Government have to find all the right ways
to do that. That is why, through the Nationality and Borders Act
last year, we brought in temporary protection measures because it
is right that we give the care and support to genuine victims.
This was down to hon. Friends who spent time with me as Home
Secretary, including my right hon. Friend the Member for
Chingford and Woodford Green ( ), my hon. Friend the
Member for Wellingborough and others, who made this case. I
worked with the Centre for Social Justice on this matter, and the
various commissioners obviously made this point clearly.
In the interests of time, I want to make two quick points. We
must work comprehensively and thoroughly to bring offenders to
justice, and our laws are too weak on this—they really are. On
the level of prosecutions, there was a targeted measure in the
Nationality and Borders Act last year to ensure that small boat
pilots would be focused on for prosecution, obviously through the
right way. Our National Crime Agency, which my hon. Friend
mentioned, deserves great credit. Much of the work it does is
based on securing intelligence information that can be disclosed
only in court for prosecution purposes. The agency’s work in this
country must be reinforced and bolstered at every single
level.
My last point is about supporting the victims. They are victims
of horrendous and heinous crimes. I am delighted that the Victims
and Prisoners Bill will come forward today—I have been going on
about it for over a decade. This is where we must work together
to ensure that the victims of human trafficking and modern-day
slavery are given support in the criminal justice system, and
that the laws are strengthened to ensure the prosecutions take
place. My hon. Friend highlighted the frankly derisory figures on
sentences and prosecutions. We must change that, and this House
can do that.
The other area to touch on for victims is statutory services. The
care for adults is good, but we have institutional state failure
on the approach for children where local authorities are allowing
children to abscond. It then becomes a policing issue, and it
should not just be about the police. Our statutory services must
step up. Mental health services, housing services and
trauma-informed approaches must be embedded.
I know the Minister has been working assiduously on this issue,
but we must start to hear further details on what work is taking
place across Government to ensure that victims are given support
and to bring forward the reforms required to give them
justice.
(in the Chair)
It is seven minutes each for the remaining speakers, so that we
start the wind-ups at 10.28 am.
10.14am
(Strangford) (DUP)
It is a pleasure to follow the right hon. Member for Witham
() and I thank her for her
contribution. I especially thank the hon. Member for
Wellingborough (Mr Bone) for securing this important debate and
powerfully setting the scene. It is a grave injustice that abuses
such as human trafficking and slavery persist in the modern
world, being used as weapons against already marginalised and
vulnerable communities. I will focus on human trafficking and its
relevance to freedom of religion or belief—two distinct but
overlapping areas of human rights where much more work could be
done by our Government. I declare an interest as chair of the
all-party parliamentary groups for international freedom of
religion or belief and for religious minorities of Pakistan.
It is a grave injustice, heaped upon other injustices, that where
girls and women are persecuted for their faith, they are also at
risk of human trafficking. Such targeting threatens to dismantle
entire communities, as women are no longer present to pass their
faith on to their children. Should women escape their captors, as
others have referred to, they face stigma and ostracism from
their community.
Reports by Open Doors on gender and freedom of religion and
belief find that in many countries where Christians are the most
persecuted, marriage documentation is often used to cover up
human trafficking. It is estimated that in the 50 countries with
the highest level of Christian persecution, forced marriages of
women have increased by 16%. It is a real issue, and, through the
APPG, we know of many cases and incidents. Those women are at a
heightened risk of human trafficking and sex trafficking as a
result. Open Doors’ research notes that traffickers often attempt
to cloak the associated sexual violence behind a claim that the
girl is now married, when clearly the girl has had no choice. In
reality, it is often a forced marriage or one resulting from
targeted seduction. We should be under no illusion what this
means; evil people—evil men—target ladies for that purpose.
Where religion forms a dimension of human trafficking and modern
slavery, the motivating factor of profit no longer applies to
those who exploit other humans. Material gain may come from the
trafficking of those who belong to a different religious group,
but the driving motivators are religious factors and the
eradication of a religious group different from one’s own. That
is a clear issue that we have identified. Sex trafficking serves
as a primary tool for the persecution of religious groups, be
that Boko Haram targeting Christians—as happens regularly —or
Daesh targeting the Yazidis. Those are just two examples; there
are many more across the middle east and the world.
Freedom of religion or belief is a cornerstone human right, one
that I adhere to and often speak about in this place, as do
others. That cornerstone right also lays the foundation for other
human rights; we cannot divorce the two—the two are married.
Human rights and religious persecution go hand in hand. The
prevalence of human trafficking in countries where freedom of
religion or belief is not realised bears witness to that, as Open
Doors, Christian Solidarity Worldwide and others have indicated.
Similarly, modern day slavery correlates with places where
freedom of religion or belief is not realised. In Pakistan,
religious minorities are ghettoised into squalid conditions, and
forced to do jobs under the most disgraceful conditions just
because they do not belong to the Sunni branch of Islam.
I was very privileged to be in Pakistan in February as part of
the delegation on behalf of the APPG for international freedom of
religion or belief. We were able to witness first hand some of
the ghettos that Christian groups and other small ethnic
minorities live in. A garage or shed has better conditions than
the places where they were living. They are pushed into small
portions of land with squalid conditions and little or no
opportunity for education and healthcare. They are a caste group,
and it concerns me. The APPG will be doing a report on the visit,
and hopefully we can make recommendations, highlight the
negatives and positives and then look at the solutions. As
always, I am solution based. Solutions are how we make things
better.
To conclude, I ask what the Government and the Minister are doing
to mainstream freedom of religion or belief in their
international development and aid policy? I am a great believer
that if we are going to give aid we should tie it in with human
rights, ensuring the opportunity for people to practice their
religion, whatever that may be. That opportunity should be there,
and when it comes to giving aid to Pakistan or any other country
across the world, we should ensure that.
Against a worldwide background of worsening religious-based
persecution, how can the Government be sure that their programmes
are successful when they operate religion-blind? I seek some
assurance from the Minister; I hope she can give it to me. If
not, I will be happy for her to follow through with a letter. I
feel that sometimes the grasp of the civil servants and the
Foreign Office officials may not be as real as we would like it
to be. We seek some assurance on that. The most vulnerable and
persecuted groups are often defined by their religious beliefs.
We cannot divorce the two. They are very clear in my mind, and
the evidential base would prove that. How are the Government—my
Government—responding sensitively and effectively to this?
10.20am
(Clacton) (Con)
It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Betts. I
congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Wellingborough (Mr
Bone) on bringing forward this important debate and speaking so
powerfully. Since Kindertransport and before, right through to
those coming from Afghanistan and Ukraine today, we are proud in
this country to give people safe haven, and we must continue to
do so.
I will focus on the boats. As a yachtsman, I am well aware of the
dangers of crossing open waters. On 23 September last year, I was
crossing the channel—quite legally—and I saw the French warship
Athos behaving in the most extraordinary fashion. I looked on the
navigation device and saw that it was circling, and it kept
circling as it left the French coast towards the UK coast. It was
circling around a very small boat crowded with people. When we
got closer, we could see those people; they were in a desperate
condition. What horrified me about that particular incident was
that the French warship was just circling them. I am a yachtsman;
I am a seaman. That is what I do. What we do is take desperate
people off those boats and make sure they are safe. I have the
evidence on my phone right here.
We must stop that sort of thing happening. Stopping illegal boats
is a matter of common humanity. As my right hon. Friend the
Member for Witham () said, 39 people lost their
lives in the back of a trailer, so it is not just the boats in
south Essex. That is because of our weak borders. The cost to the
taxpayer is enormous because of this Home Office malfunction, as
I see it. It is not acceptable. I believe something like £7
million per day is spent on hotel fees, which is outrageous, but
we are looking to address this. We have to show humanity about
it.
Locally, at a party conference last year I was contacted by the
chief executive of my local council. He told me that he had been
given 24 hours’ notice, at a weekend, that we were going to have
a migrant hotel suddenly opened upon us. The council did not have
time to get services in line. Those people would need help. It
was a question of putting desperate people in a deprived place.
This was not nimbyism; the local council had identified other,
more suitable sites, but the company that the Home Office had
employed had decided to open that site within 24 hours.
Fortunately, by working with officials and asking an urgent
question in the Chamber, I was able to get that particular
incident stopped. We are dealing with this with a scattergun
approach. We are being reactive as the incidents happen. We
cannot go on like this. We cannot keep fighting a rearguard
action. For the sake of humanity, and for the sake of the
taxpayers of Clacton and elsewhere, we must stop the boats. That
means backing the new Government measures, which have been laid
out here today, and making the Home Office more logistically
competent. In my view, and I have said this several times before,
that means liaising with our French counterparts and getting
British boots on the ground in France. We can do this. I am sure
our French counterparts would like to see it. That would stop the
boats leaving those beaches, and prevent the horror that so many
people go through. We saw a child on a beach in Kent, and we
never want to see that again.
(in the Chair)
I thank all hon. Members for keeping to time. We will move on to
the wind-ups now. Each Front-Bench speaker has 10 minutes, or
effectively 11, given that we have a bit of extra time.
10.24am
(Cumbernauld, Kilsyth
and Kirkintilloch East) (SNP)
I, too, start by congratulating the hon. Member for
Wellingborough (Mr Bone) on securing what he quite rightly
described as a very timely debate. I hope that he is restored to
full health very soon. I also very genuinely thank him for all
his work over many years, which I think is recognised across the
House; he has been a real champion for victims of
trafficking.
The starting point for this debate—unusually, I agree with the
right hon. Member for Witham ()—should be recognition that we
have in place across the United Kingdom some genuinely
world-leading pieces of legislation that are designed to tackle
trafficking and slavery. The problem, as a couple of hon. Members
have already said, is that the message coming from those who work
with trafficking victims is that we are in danger of going
backwards and that these are truly worrying times for people
caught up in those appalling crimes.
That is because—again, as has already been alluded to in this
debate—the Government are increasingly conflating trafficking and
immigration. That is despite the fact that, as other hon. Members
have also already said, since 2018 over 16,000 British nationals
have been referred to the national referral mechanism. That is a
clear reminder that modern slavery is a crime of exploitation and
not immigration. Despite that, however, the Government now seem
to be consciously stripping away rights and protections from
trafficking victims as a tool of immigration policy. So, the
first and most important call that I make today is that we need
the Government to recommit to eradicating modern-day slavery,
because at the moment the Government’s commitment is increasingly
being seen as playing second fiddle to immigration policy.
Indeed, I almost think that we are at a point where we have to
ask whether we should have trafficking policy being decided by
the same Department that is in charge of immigration policy,
because I think that one is dominating the other and that is not
good for victims.
I will address three issues today. First, I will briefly consider
the impact of the Illegal Migration Bill; secondly, I will take a
quick look at some of the so-called “evidence” being used to
justify that Bill, which the hon. Member for Rotherham () has already spoken about a
little; and, thirdly, one issue that has not been touched on
already is some of the updates to the modern slavery statutory
guidance, which was implemented on 30 January 2023.
First of all, in relation to the Illegal Migration Bill, it is
fair to say and Members will be aware that there were widespread
and deep-seated concerns raised right across the House yesterday
about the impact of that Bill on victims of trafficking. Members
will be aware that I absolutely reject the logic of deterrence.
However, even if someone accepts that premise, the logic of
deterrence that permeates the Bill just does not apply when it
comes to trafficking, because the simple point is that we cannot
deter a trafficking victim from coming here; it is not a free
choice, as the hon. Member for Wellingborough pointed out. So it
makes no sense for the Government to massively undermine the
various UK modern slavery laws through the Bill in the way that
they propose to do.
The carveout in the Bill for situations where there is assistance
with an investigation is worthless. That is because the result of
the Bill will be that trafficking victims simply will not come
forward to seek help at all, particularly if they are simply
going to be discarded as soon as they have served any useful
purpose in the criminal justice system. Consequently, I suspect
that the Bill may well deliver a reduction in the number of
possible trafficking victims being referred into the NRM, but
that will simply be because fewer victims are coming forward and
not because there are fewer victims.
Indeed, the Anti-Trafficking Monitoring Group is clear that the
Bill will increase the number of victims and reduce the number of
prosecutions against traffickers, driving the modern slavery
system underground, meaning that survivors will no longer be able
to report trafficking and access the assistance that they
genuinely require.
Secondly, like the hon. Member for Rotherham, I will speak about
all these allegations that people are “gaming the system”, to
quote the current Home Secretary. I think that that narrative is
quite simply not backed up by evidence, so the Home Office and
the Home Secretary herself should provide the evidence to back up
those claims, if there is any. The Home Office has already been
reprimanded by the Office for Statistics Regulation and in
December 2022 three UN special rapporteurs also expressed alarm
at the UK Government’s increasing use of unsubstantiated and
unevidenced claims.
The simple point made by those working in the field is that abuse
of the modern slavery system is barely possible, and that point
was made several times yesterday as well in the debate in the
main Chamber, because someone cannot just claim to be a modern
slave and enter the NRM in that way; someone has to be referred
by an approved first responder. The Home Office must trust its
own system, which prevents people with fraudulent claims of
modern slavery from accessing support. The reasonable grounds
decision within the NRM is designed exactly for that purpose.
So what are the actual statistics that are available to us? Based
on Home Office figures, of the 83,000 people who arrived in the
UK on small boats between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2022,
only 7% were referred as potential victims of modern slavery. In
the calendar year 2022, it was only 6% and the percentage
subsequently recognised as victims of modern slavery or
trafficking was 85%. There is also no evidence of an uptick in
those being referred into the NRM and receiving a negative
decision. The calendar year 2022 is absolutely consistent with
earlier years in showing that 90% or more of those being referred
into the NRM received conclusive grounds decisions that are
positive.
This is the issue for the Minister: if the Home Office is going
to persist in arguing that the modern slavery system is being
abused, it must produce evidence. It would be useful to know what
evidence and data the Government have.
I agree with the hon. Members speaking yesterday that the Illegal
Migration Bill, which is now before Parliament, risks pushing
victims away from seeking support and back into the arms of
traffickers. We should improve the NRM and trafficking
assessments. We should improve access to support and not drive
people away from it.
The modern slavery statutory guidance, which was operationalised
on 30 January 2023, was designed to remove what the Prime
Minister referred to as the “gold plating” in our modern slavery
system. Those updates include changes to the decision-making
thresholds, which require survivors to provide unreasonably high
levels of evidence in unrealistically short timeframes. New
exclusions for bad-faith claims have been applied, but without
sufficient safeguards built in. Victims and first responders will
not be able to gather the necessary evidence in the five-day
timeframe, meaning that genuine trafficking victims will be
prevented from entering the NRM. There is no data yet available
to determine the impact that the new guidance has had, so it
would be useful to hear from the Minister what early analysis the
Department has done about the impact of the new guidelines.
In implementing these guidelines, it seems to have been forgotten
that the whole premise of the NRM and the two-tier
decision-making process is to allow people to get a reasonable
grounds decision fairly easily in order to access a recovery and
reflection period. At that stage, evidence can be gathered in
order to receive a conclusive grounds decision, if that can be
reached.
Upping the reasonable grounds threshold will directly affect
first responder organisations. They will have to provide a higher
level of and more complex evidence, meaning that the amount of
evidence and casework required to get a positive reasonable
grounds decision, when compared with the situation previously,
will put further extensive pressure on organisations that are
already at breaking point. One designated first responder
organisation has commented:
“The update puts additional burden on an already collapsing First
Responder system, with capacity for referrals dangerously
low.”
Concerns have been raised by modern slavery and trafficking
organisations that the changes are building on previous
regressive changes, including when the recovery period was
reduced from 45 days to 30 and the multi-agency assurance panel
process was removed. There are significant concerns that,
together, those changes will make it harder for survivors to be
identified and to access support, and that this represents a
regression in efforts to increase identification and
trauma-informed support for modern slavery victims.
We could have said a lot in this debate about where we should go
with our modern slavery policy. There are calls for more
evidence-led policies; for collaborative approaches; for
investment to fix the NRM and the huge backlog there; to improve
training for first responder organisations; and to recognise more
first responder organisations. There are calls for better and
longer support for survivors that is tailored to their individual
needs. That helps them and it helps us to prosecute criminals. We
must improve prosecution rates and, as many hon. Members have
said, we must have an independent anti-slavery commissioner in
place.
The problem is, however, that before we can move forward, we must
stop moving backwards. Sadly, things appear to be getting worse,
rather than better. At the very least, we must take out the
modern slavery provisions in the Illegal Migration Bill. We must
also reconsider some of the recent changes to modern slavery
guidance. We have to consider whether we can continue to have one
Department responsible both for looking after trafficking victims
and for immigration policy, because it seems to be delivering
absolutely the wrong results.
10.33am
(Halifax) (Lab)
It is always a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for
Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East (). I will start, as
others have, by paying tribute to and thanking the hon. Member
for Wellingborough (Mr Bone) for securing the debate. In
addition, I thank him for all the campaigning work that he has
done in this policy area. He shared powerful examples of where
the failures in the system have further compounded the risk,
particularly for children, of being re-trafficked. I also join
him from the outset in paying tribute to the incredible work of
Justice and Care, which has had a transformative effect. I have
had the opportunity to see their victim navigators in West
Yorkshire and the tremendous impact that they have had in
supporting victims and securing prosecutions.
We know that the number of victims of these heinous crimes is
increasing. My hon. Friend the Member for Rotherham (), like almost every Member
who has contributed to the debate, made the point that we were
once so proud of our modern slavery laws, but, as we have just
heard, we seem to be taking backward steps in identifying victims
and supporting them through to the prosecution of their abusers.
Nearly 17,000 potential victims were referred to the NRM in
2022—a 33% increase on the previous year—but charities have
predicted, using police data, that there could be at least
100,000 victims in the UK.
I want to share the story of Sanu, who was tricked into living
and working in slave-like conditions in the UK. For seven years,
he was beaten, threatened and given no wages for the constant
work he did in his trafficker’s shop. He had had to beg for money
and food. Now he is living in a Salvation Army safe house where
the support he is receiving is helping him to overcome his
ordeal.
Sanu told the Salvation Army:
“I came to the UK to study. That was my goal…I worked at least 50
to 60 hours a week and sometimes 90 to 100. I would start at 8
o’clock and have to carry on until he said I could leave. I
wasn’t allowed to go anywhere; no mobile phone. I couldn’t go to
the GP. He said if you talk to anyone then the police will come
and get you…My trafficker knew I had nowhere to stay and no other
friends. He knew how to control me. He controlled me like in a
video game with a remote controller…Every minute every second he
took from me. Even now I can still be scared. What happened to me
is all wrong. I still have trauma and nightmares…I try to sleep
but I still see his face, it is like he’s still chasing me.”
I do not need to tell the Members who are here in Westminster
Hall that when we talk about victims, we are not solely talking
about foreign nationals. The reporting of British victims to the
NRM is rising, and 2022 saw the highest number of British
possible victims identified since the NRM began. Most of those,
as we have heard, were children. In 2022, one NRM referral in
five was for a British child, and many more British children are
thought to be vulnerable. Research suggests that there is a
failure to refer many British victims to the NRM because they are
not identified as victims of modern slavery or because of missed
opportunities to safeguard them.
In the face of such a crisis, we need a system that finds
victims, protects them, supports them and helps them to rebuild
their lives, but as things stand that is not happening. Many
victims never access the NRM support system, and if they do,
there are huge delays in decision making. That means that many
are stuck in the system, receiving wildly varying quality of care
and unable to move through. Once people are confirmed as victims,
there are few meaningful support mechanisms to help them rebuild
their lives, and the impact of that on their mental health must
not be understated.
How do we ensure that those vulnerable victims are reached and
receive help once they have been identified? We desperately need
to improve the first responder role. Effective, informed training
and safeguarding procedures are needed to ensure that victims do
not slip through the net. Training and policies need to include
increasing understanding of the specific needs, circumstances and
entitlements of British national victims, improving the
transition from child to adult services, and the development of
professional modern slavery risk assessment tools for British
nationals.
Let me look at how we can improve the decision-making process.
Decision makers must have modern slavery understanding, expertise
and experience. Evidence from pilot schemes that have devolved
the decision making away from the Home Office shows that the
pilots look to have generated impressive results. The processing
is speeded up, and any conflict of interest for the Home Office
is removed. A multi-agency approach, and the broad knowledge and
wisdom that come with it, could improve decision making for
victims—certainly those with complex needs.
The key to truly ending these terrible crimes is to lock up the
traffickers—a point about which the former Home Secretary, the
right hon. Member for Witham (), spoke powerfully. We know
that the number of victims is increasing, but prosecution rates
are shamefully low. Ministry of Justice statistics show that in
2021 there were only 93 prosecutions and 33 convictions in cases
in which modern slavery was the principal offence.
Proper support enables modern slavery victims to engage in
securing the prosecution of traffickers. Support for victims,
including victim navigators, whose incredible work I have had the
opportunity to see, is central to successful convictions.
I want to talk about a case study that was shared in The Guardian
this week by investigative reporter Annie Kelly. Julia is a
Ukrainian survivor of human trafficking and sexual exploitation.
She was tricked into coming to the UK under the false promise of
legitimate hotel work. For five years, she was controlled by
criminal gangs who had seized her passport and forced her to
engage in prostitution. She had no control over who she saw or
what she was expected to do. Desperate to support her child back
in Ukraine and unable to speak English, Julia says she felt
trapped by her immigration status and her debt. When she was
rescued by the police, she began to build a relationship with a
victim navigator, who supported her. Julia, with the victim
navigator’s support, worked with the police, and her bravery has
resulted in the establishment of an international taskforce, the
identification of 120 other female victims and the conviction of
five exploiters. Julia is now recovering and rebuilding her
life.
Julia’s story and research from charities on the frontline make
it clear that consistent support means that victims engage with
police investigations. That support needs to come first, to
create stability and confidence, and the evidence backs this up.
The final evaluation of Justice and Care’s victim navigator pilot
scheme found that between September 2018 and June 2022, 92% of
survivors who were supported engaged with police, compared with
just 44% of survivors without a victim navigator. Twenty
exploiters were convicted, 38 prosecutions of accused exploiters
were supported and the total sentences for convicted offenders
amounted to 178 years and eight months. Between 2018 and 2020,
all 62 adult survivors receiving long-term support through one of
the Home Office local authority pathways pilot schemes supported
a police investigation.
The public are very much ahead of the Government on this; they
recognise the connection between supporting victims and bringing
offenders to justice. Recent polling for the CSJ and Justice and
Care revealed that 82% of the people asked agreed that more
Government support for victims of modern slavery is needed to
bring more criminal gangs to justice. All of this goes to show
that if Government were serious about convicting traffickers,
they would be serious about support for victims, but as others
have said over the past two days, the Government’s legislation
will make it much worse.
The Illegal Migration Bill will have a devastating impact on
victims of modern slavery. This is a quote from a letter by the
CEOs of organisations that support people through the modern
slavery victim care contract:
“Were this bill to come into effect, we fear that many of these
survivors would be denied the opportunities to rebuild their
lives and reclaim their autonomy.
This bill will do nothing to break cycles of exploitation or help
people break free of modern slavery. Instead, it will feed the
criminal networks who profit from the lives of vulnerable people.
It is essential that genuine victims of modern slavery are
afforded the right to seek support.
Furthermore, by closing the route to safety and support, the
Illegal Migration Bill risks strengthening the hands of
trafficking networks. Traffickers keep people under their control
with threats that they will not receive help if they reach out to
the authorities. This bill will substantiate this claim and
further dissuade survivors from coming forward…Failure to support
survivors will result in an undermining of criminal
investigations and prosecutions.”
Modern slavery referrals are only a small proportion of overall
illegal migration and asylum claims. As the Centre for Social
Justice states, only 7% of small boat arrivals since 2018 have
been referred to the modern slavery national referral
mechanism.
I join the hon. Member for Wellingborough in stressing how
disappointed we are that Dame Sara Thornton, who was incredibly
effective as the Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner, left the
post in April last year and it has been vacant for nearly a year.
That is unacceptable, and I urge the Minister to update the House
on why it has not been a priority for this Government and how
they intend to correct that.
We agree with the hon. Member for Thurrock () that cuckooing is an
abhorrent crime. We welcome the Government’s commitment this week
to engage with stakeholders on a new offence, but I urge them to
move forward as a matter of urgency to protect people who might
be subject to such a degree of abuse.
It is right that we try to stop the dangerous crossings—the human
cost is so great—but brutal and cruel targeting of vulnerable
victims is not the right path, and I hope the Minister has
understood that.
(in the Chair)
Could the Minister finish by 10.58 am to allow to do a short wind-up at the
end?
10.44am
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home
Department ( )
I shall do my best. It is a pleasure to serve under your
chairmanship, Mr Betts. I am very grateful to my hon. Friend the
Member for Wellingborough (Mr Bone) for securing this debate. As
he made abundantly clear, he has a long-standing interest in this
issue and has done a lot of work on it over the past decade. I
welcome this opportunity to respond, and I will address as many
of the points that he and others made as I can in this reduced
time.
First and foremost, I want to express my total disgust at cases
of modern slavery and human trafficking. The Government are
steadfast in our determination to prevent these heinous crimes
from happening, to support genuine victims and to bring
perpetrators to justice. This is an ever-evolving threat, and our
policy levers need to keep pace with changing trends.
I pay tribute to the previous Prime Minister, my right hon.
Friend the Member for Maidenhead (Mrs May), and the former Member
of this House, . I second the comments from
my hon. Friend the Member for Wellingborough, who thanked my
right hon. Friend the Member for Maidenhead for all her work on
the landmark Modern Slavery Act, and , who was one of the early
advocates in this field and is now the chair of the Human
Trafficking Foundation. I thank them and all others who have
contributed to our efforts in this space.
The former Home Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for
Witham (), worked very hard on this
issue for three and a half years. I recall that in one of the
first meetings I had with her when I was a new MP, she talked
about upstream work and about looking internationally. Her work
in this field required foresight and effort. We must not forget
to thank those who have worked hard on this issue.
I was going to outline in detail the difference between human
trafficking and people smuggling, but I do not need to because my
hon. Friend the Member for Wellingborough did that most
eloquently—I will save half a minute by skipping over that page.
Instead, I will talk about the progress that has been made on
prosecutions. Many Members have emphasised the need to increase
prosecutions. It is shocking that there were only 188 live
operations in 2016, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Witham
will recall. That rose to 3,724 live investigations in February
2023. The Government have made real progress, and we continue to
be committed to improving the criminal justice response to modern
slavery and to ensuring that law enforcement has the right tools
and capability to identify victims and tackle offenders.
Prosecutions have increased since the MSA came into force, other
than in 2020 when there was a decrease due to courts closing
during the covid pandemic. In 2021, the Government prosecuted 466
individuals for modern slavery crimes, with a conviction rate of
more than 70%. Those with an interest in criminal justice will
know that that is high. The Government have granted more than
£1.3 million of funding to the Modern Slavery and Organised
Immigration Crime unit, which operates out of Devon and Cornwall
Police and have supported the development of national
infrastructure to bring consistency across forces. There has also
been a significant increase in activity since the Modern Slavery
Act came into force, leading to better identification,
information and evidence, and an increase in live investigations,
prosecutions and, importantly, convictions.
Notwithstanding that success, there is a great deal more to do.
The Government recognise that there are still challenges in the
criminal justice system, which is why we are continuing to do
more with law enforcement generally and the Crown Prosecution
Service, including identifying ways of supporting victims to
engage with prosecutions to help bring the exploiter to
justice.
In addition, the Human Trafficking Foundation’s lived experience
advisory panel will work with the Modern Slavery and Organised
Immigration Crime unit. I hope that this collaboration will help
to enhance guidance and ensure that the police take account of
victim and survivor experience. I am grateful to Justice and Care
for its work in this field, and to the victim navigators. We
welcome their use by law enforcement agencies across the UK.
It is hoped and expected, through intense preparation, that the
Online Safety Bill will assist in this area. The Government will
add section 2 of the Modern Slavery Act to the list of priority
offences in the Bill. That section makes it an offence to arrange
or facilitate the travel of another person, including through
recruitment, with a view to their exploitation.
Right hon. and hon. Members said that sentencing needs to be
looked at and raised concerns about the low level of sentences
handed down by courts relative to other offences. The Modern
Slavery Act 2015 gives law enforcement agencies the tools to
tackle modern slavery, including a maximum life sentence for
perpetrators and enhanced protection for victims, and following
consultation in August 2021, the Sentencing Council published new
sentencing guidelines for those convicted of modern slavery in
England and Wales, but further progress is needed. Judges and
magistrates now have clear dedicated guidelines when sentencing
adult offenders who are guilty of offences under the 2015 Act,
including slavery, servitude, forced or compulsory labour and
trafficking for the purposes of exploitation. The new guidelines
came into effect in October 2021 and aim to promote consistency
of approach, improve the general area and help the courts to pass
appropriate sentences when dealing with modern slavery
offences.
Will the Minister give way?
Miss Dines
I will make a little progress. I will mention at this point that
I listened carefully to the hon. Member for
Champion—[Interruption.] Sorry, the hon. Member for Rotherham
()—I will be reminded about
that later by my hon. Friend the Member for Rother Valley (). The hon. Lady has
done some hard work on this subject, and I took a clear note of
what she said. I will give way to her briefly, but there really
is not much time.
The focus on sentencing is very welcome, but is the Minister also
focusing on the pull factor? Women coming over tend to be
sexually exploited, and men are going into, for example, cannabis
farms. If we could be tougher and put legislation around the pull
factor, rather than just dealing with the outcomes, that would be
really helpful in preventing this awful crime.
Miss Dines
The hon. Lady makes an important point. It is exactly about the
pull factor, and not necessarily just because of gender-specific
professions or exploitation, such as cannabis farms or the sexual
arena. We must be careful about the pull factor; when he was
giving evidence yesterday, the Prime Minister said that the pull
factor is a big factor and we must be careful. When concerns are
expressed about changing the present regime, as has been
elucidated over the past two days in the main Chamber, we must be
cautious because, as the Prime Minister said, we do not want to
create a pull factor, whether it is for children or a particular
class or group of individuals who may be running the criminal
activities or being exploited in the way that the hon. Lady said.
That is really important.
I know that cuckooing is close to the hearts of several Members
who have spoken today, particularly my hon. Friend the Member for
Thurrock (). The Government fully
recognise the exploitation and degradation associated with that
pernicious practice and are determined to tackle it. The Home
Office-funded National County Lines Co-ordination Centre has
identified all national law enforcement initiatives designed to
tackle cuckooing, and the Government are actively considering
whether new legislation is needed. It is an important item under
consideration, because it is a most dreadful crime. We really
need to protect the most vulnerable in our society. The
Government’s recently issued antisocial behaviour action plan
will engage stakeholders, and I am hopeful that there will be a
new criminal offence in this area.
I know that hon. Members also feel keenly about victim support.
The United Kingdom continues to meet its obligations to support
victims of modern slavery as a signatory of the Council of Europe
convention on action against trafficking in human beings, or
ECAT. The support given by this Government is unparalleled, and
indeed a world leader, valued at over £300 million over a
five-year period. As we all know, the Home Office funds the
modern slavery victim care contract, which supports victims in
England and Wales to give them access to vital support they need
to assist with their recovery. That includes, as has been
mentioned today, access to safehouse accommodation, financial
support and a dedicated support worker.
The Government are committed to ensuring that the national
referral mechanism effectively supports both victims to recover
and the prosecution of their exploiters. Statistics show that the
better someone is supported, the more likely they are to give
evidence and bring their exploiter to justice through the Crown.
We made it clear in the Nationality and Borders Act 2022—as a
former Home Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for
Witham, is keenly aware of this—that where a public authority,
such as the police, is pursuing an investigation or criminal
proceedings, confirmed victims who co-operate and need to remain
in the UK in order to do so will be granted temporary permission
to stay for as long as they are required to be in the UK to
support the investigation.
I will turn briefly—I have only three minutes left—to child
victims. Concern has been voiced that adults get better care, and
there appears to be some evidence of that and of care being
patchy across the country. That must be addressed by local
authorities, other stakeholders and mental health services. As
the safeguarding Minister, I am concerned if young people are
less effectively protected when they are in the care of the
state. Sometimes children are less protected than adults and that
cannot be allowed to continue. The Government are working very
hard and other options are being considered.
The Government have, to their credit, rolled out independent
child trafficking guardians to two thirds of local authorities in
England and Wales, but more needs to be done. Those guardians are
an effective and additional source of advice for trafficked
children, and they can advocate on the children’s behalf. We know
from the debate that that approach has been successful. A
staggered approach to roll-out has been adopted, with robust
built-in evaluations along the way to make sure the service meets
the demands of vulnerable children. That must evolve to do
better.
We will continue to review how the needs of individual children
are best met through the programme. We must not allow children to
be taken away from a place of safety—a children’s home or a
foster placement—to be abused and then brought back in. That
simply cannot be tolerated. Local authorities must work harder
and in close co-operation with the police. Across the country,
there must be no area—ethnic or geographical—where standards are
not good. We will work harder to protect child victims.
In the debate, right hon. and hon. Members said clearly that a
commissioner must be appointed. The Home Secretary recognises the
importance of the role of the Independent Anti-Slavery
Commissioner and has launched a new open competition to recruit
for the role. The advert for the role went live last month and
the advertising has just concluded. The process is going as
quickly as possible. It is hoped that all necessary steps will be
taken in a short period and that the best person for the role
will be recruited. There will be news very soon. The position has
improved from a few months ago when there was not even a
competition. I can reassure the House that there is movement in
that area.
In our modern slavery strategy, we are still regarded as a world
leader. The Illegal Migration Bill is essential to make sure that
our borders are properly protected and that criminal gangs do not
bring people into exploitation. There is a need for reform. I
need to wind up, so I cannot say as much as I wanted to, but I
will say that there will be protection, and vulnerable people
will not be removed unless the disqualifications under the
Nationality and Borders Act apply. I am able to commit to a
meeting, as hon. Members asked.
The points raised by my right hon. Friends the Members for
Maidenhead and for Chingford and Woodford Green ( ) were addressed in
yesterday’s debate by the Minister for Immigration, who stated
that there is evidence that, unfortunately, the Modern Slavery
Act has enabled some false applications. The 3,500 referrals
envisaged on the passing of the Act have risen to 17,000
referrals and there is evidence of abuse of the system. In 2021,
73% of people who arrived on small boats and were detained for
removal made modern slavery claims, so more needs to be done, but
I can commit to ensure that genuine victims are discussed in a
meeting with the Immigration Minister and interested parties.
(in the Chair)
has less than one minute to wind
up.
10.59am
Mr Bone
This is wonderful, Mr Betts. I get to sit in the Chair that you
have, and when we come to Westminster Hall we have a debate that
is non-political about an important issue. I have learned from
people’s contributions today, so I thank everyone for attending.
The Minister dealt with her speech on an important subject at
rapid speed. I am grateful that she has agreed to a meeting to
look into the problems of the Illegal Migration Bill and modern
day slavery. I thank her for that and I thank everyone for
attending.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered the matter of human trafficking
and modern slavery.
|