The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Suella Braverman)
With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement on
the police’s use of stop and search. It is utterly devastating when
someone is killed by a weapon. Passivity is not an option, nor is
wishful thinking; this will change only if we act. The police have
been crystal clear with me that stop and search is a vital tool—it
is literally vital; we cannot hope to get weapons off our streets
without...Request free trial
The Secretary of State for the Home Department ()
With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement on
the police’s use of stop and search.
It is utterly devastating when someone is killed by a weapon.
Passivity is not an option, nor is wishful thinking; this will
change only if we act. The police have been crystal clear with me
that stop and search is a vital tool—it is literally vital; we
cannot hope to get weapons off our streets without it. Of course,
it must be used skilfully, responsibly and proportionately, as is
true of every power with which we invest the police. But it would
be a tragic mistake to conclude that stop and search is too
controversial to use extensively or that it cannot be used
effectively with sensible safeguards.
Suggestions that stop and search is a means of victimising young
black men have it precisely the wrong way around; the facts are
that young black men are disproportionately more likely to be
victims of violent crimes. They are the ones most in need of
protection. This is about saving the lives of young black men.
Moreover, being stopped and searched when carrying a weapon can
prevent someone, of whatever background, from making a terrible
mistake that they can never undo. Sometimes we lose sight of that
point when debating stop and search.
Black people account for about 3% of our population, yet almost a
third of under-25s killed by knives are black. Ninety-nine young
people lost their lives to knife crime in England and Wales in
the year to March 2022: 31 of them were black; 49 were white; 16
were from other ethnic minority groups; and three victims did not
have their ethnicity recorded. It is always bad policy to place
unsubstantiated theories ahead of demonstrable fact—in this case,
it would be lethal.
Stop and search works. Sir Mark Rowley, the Met police
Commissioner, has said there are
“countless examples of offenders being discovered to have
dangerous weapons”
during stop and searches, as well as
“tools for burglary and drugs”.
Sir Mark cited research from the Oxford journal of policing that
showed that stop and search can cut the number of attempted
murders by
“50 per cent or more”
in the worst crime hotspots. Since 2019, more than 40,000 weapons
have been taken off our streets and there have been more than
220,000 arrests following a stop and search.
We are starting to trial serious violence reduction orders, which
can be given to those with convictions for knife offences. An
SVRO means that the police can stop and search that individual at
any point, to see if they are carrying a weapon. This will deter
those people who repeatedly carry weapons and endanger the
public. I saw for myself how well this is working in Merseyside,
where there are five live orders already. Superintendent Phil
Mullally, Merseyside’s lead for serious violence and knife crime,
has said:
“These new powers will enable us to continue to drive down knife
crime and reoffending.”
I am proud to say that under this Government it has never been
easier for the police to make legitimate use of their stop and
search powers, and the use of those powers has never been more
transparent and accountable. The public are crying out for
common-sense policing, such as the use of tried-and-tested
methods to drive down crime. Stop and search is a prime example
of such a method.
I am working in lockstep with police forces to get this right.
Today, I met Chief Constable Amanda Pearson, who leads on stop
and search for the National Police Chiefs’ Council, to discuss
how best to empower police officers to better use stop and
search.
I have written to all chief constables, asking them to provide
strategic leadership and direction in the use of stop-and-search
powers; ensure that every officer is confident in the effective
and appropriate use of all stop-and-search powers, including the
use of suspicionless powers; to investigate instances where
someone is obstructing or interfering with the use of these
powers and, if necessary, make arrests; and to be proactive in
publishing body-worn video footage, which will protect officers
who conduct themselves properly and instil greater public
confidence.
Public confidence is the linchpin of our model of policing by
consent. Therefore, I am looking carefully at strengthening local
community scrutiny. Transparency is vital; so is community
engagement. I want every community to be able to trust in stop
and search. I want to present a clear picture of the
stop-and-search landscape that shows the good work being done on
the frontline.
That is why the Government will amend the Police and Criminal
Evidence Act 1984 code A, to make clear when the police should
communicate when suspicionless powers are used in a public order
and section 60 context. Suspicionless stop and search must be
used responsibly, but we cannot do without it.
I am also mandating data collection on stop and search, as part
of the annual data requirement for the Government’s statistics
bulletin, published every year. We already collect more data on
stop and search than ever before. That data is posted online,
enabling Police and Crime
Commissioners and others to hold forces to account for their
use. Disparities in the use of stop and search remain, but they
have continued to decrease for the last three years.
My Department has trialled a more sophisticated approach to
calculating disparity in the Metropolitan Police Service. It has
produced an analysis based on actual suspects of violent crime,
rather than usual residents of an area, as the denominator for
calculating rates of stop and search. This is still experimental
but shows that disparity ratios were significantly reduced for
black people compared with the traditional method, falling from
3.7 to 1.2.
It is always heartbreaking and distressing to read reports about
stabbings and shootings. I am struck by how often mothers of
murdered young black men say that stop and search could have
saved their sons’ lives. We owe it to them to heed their call.
The facts are on their side. Stop and search works and is a vital
tool in the fight against serious violent crime. I commend the
statement to the House.
Mr Speaker
I call the shadow Home Secretary.
3.37pm
(Normanton, Pontefract and
Castleford) (Lab)
Knife crime destroys lives, devastates families and creates fear
and trauma in communities. Last year, too many young people lost
their lives to knife crime—young people who had their whole lives
ahead of them
Knife crime is up nearly 70%, compared with just seven years ago.
Knife-enabled rapes and knife-enabled threats to kill are at
record highs, with some of the steepest increases in the suburbs,
smaller cities, towns and counties. Compared with over a decade
ago, knife crime is up more than fivefold in Surrey and has
almost trebled in Sussex. From Milton Keynes to Swindon to
Newcastle, I have spoken to distressed parents and community
leaders about rising knife crime and their devastation at young
lives being lost.
The Government’s response is wholly inadequate. The serious
violence strategy is more than five years out of date, the
serious violence taskforce was disbanded and everyone knows, from
their own communities, that too little is being done to divert
young people away from violence and crime. There are just 18
violence reduction units. When the Home Secretary claims serious
violence is going down, she is focusing on the covid period,
because the worrying truth is that knife crime and gun crime are
rising again.
Today’s statement, therefore, is wholly inadequate as a response
to knife crime. Stop and search is an extremely important tool in
the fight against knife crime, but it is not the whole strategy.
That is why we need a much more comprehensive approach: as part
of our mission, Labour has set the determination to halve knife
crime and serious violent crime. As stop and search is an
important tool, it also needs to be used in an effective and fair
way. His Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary said that
“well-targeted stop and search is a valuable tool”,
but how the police do it is as important as the act itself, and
communities have clear concerns about the fair use of stop and
search. His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and
Rescue Services had previously said:
“Unfair use of powers can be counterproductive if it leads people
to think it is acceptable to not comply with the law. It may also
make people unwilling to report when they are the victim of crime
or come forward as witnesses.”
That is why it is important that the recommendations that the
inspectorate and the police watchdog have made are taken
seriously and implemented, and why best practice from forces who
are doing a good job is spread across the country.
There have been reports from the inspectorate in 2015, 2017, 2021
and from the police watchdog, little of which the Home Secretary
has even acknowledged. She has dismissed concerns about
disproportionality. Of course, stop and search for knife crime
and for dangerous weapons will likely be used most in the areas
and communities where attacks have been the highest. That will
affect the number of searches for weapons among young black men,
but the chief inspector has said that the presence of
disproportionality in crime victimisation rates does not
adequately explain why there is disproportionality in stop and
search rates. In her statement, the Home Secretary seems to be
focusing only on young black men. I think she refers to them
around six times, with only one reference to people who are
white, even though her own statement recognises that young black
men are still the minority of knife crime victims. Does she
recognise the importance of following the evidence wherever it
takes the police?
The inspectorate said that
“35 years since the introduction of stop and search, the police
still cannot explain why these powers are used
disproportionately.”
It points out that that is partly because the majority of
searches are for drug possession, not for knife crime, and yet
figures show that drug use is lower among black people than among
white people. The Home Secretary has not addressed that at all in
her statement. Will she address the issue of disproportionate
drug possession searches?
I welcome the references to the introduction of stronger
community scrutiny and better data collection. Those are vital,
but they should have been mandatory for many years—they were
recommended many years ago. Where is the action that has been
repeatedly recommended: training on the use of force; training on
de-escalation and communications skills; and proper data
collection on traffic stops. None of those has been referred to
in her statement. How many of the 18 recommendations by the
Independent Office for Police Conduct last year have been fully
implemented? How many recommendations from the inspectorate have
been fully implemented?
Stop and search is a vital tool as part of a proper strategy, but
we need the wider strategy, too. Why is the violence reduction
unit approach being used by the Home Secretary in only 18 areas
when knife crime is rising in communities across the country? Why
has there been no new serious violence strategy for five years?
Many people now fear a long, hot summer without swift action. Why
is there still no action to bring in a new law on the criminal
exploitation of young people, which we have called for? Why is
there still no comprehensive action on youth mentors and support
for early intervention?
We need a serious approach to tackling knife crime and supporting
the police to use their tools in an effective and fair way so
that they can save lives. Too many young lives are at stake. We
need more than this from the Home Secretary.
I thank the right hon. Lady for her response. It is not just my
view, but the view of police that stop and search is
fundamentally about saving lives and keeping the public safe.
Where used proportionately, stop and search works. Since 2019,
more than 40,000 weapons have been seized through stop and
search, and 220,000 arrests have been made. The 2021 inspectorate
report concluded that the vast majority of stop and search
decisions are based on reasonable grounds. That is potentially
thousands of lives saved and countless violent incidents
prevented.
To those who claim it is a disproportionate tool—a racist tool—I
say that we must be honest about what that means for victims. The
right hon. Lady, when she was Chairman of the Home Affairs
Committee, stated:
“Stop & search is more disproportionate now than 22yrs ago,
with no adequate explanation or justification for nature &
scale of racial disparities.”
Yet again, she is on the wrong side of the argument, and yet
again she is not on the side of victims.
What is disproportionate is that black people are four times more
likely to be murdered than white people. What is disproportionate
is that young black men are more likely to be victims of knife
crime than young white men. That is the disproportionality that I
am focused on stopping. It is important that we look at the
matter with a cool head and on the basis of the evidence.
The emerging picture based on London suggests that when we adjust
the data to consider the proportion of suspects in an area and
its demographics, rather than considering the data for the
country as a whole, the disproportionality of stop and search
falls away hugely. I urge the right hon. Lady to consider and
reflect on those facts rather than jumping to knee-jerk
assumptions. Of course it is right that the powers are used in a
responsible and measured way—that is why engagement with
communities must be respectful—and it is right that the powers
are subject to the highest levels of scrutiny. We now see very
few complaints about individual stop and searches. Training on
legal and procedural justice has improved and we have seen
confidence levels increase.
Overall, I am very proud of this Conservative Government’s
achievements: a record number of police officers ever in the
history of policing, 100,000 weapons seized since 2019 and
falling crime—in fact, serious violent crime has fallen by 40%
since 2010. What has Labour done? Labour Members voted against
our measures to strengthen the police. They voted against tougher
sentences for rapists. They voted against our Bill to stop the
militant protesters. Same old Labour—they never fail to miss an
opportunity to be on the wrong side of the argument. This
Conservative Government are on the side of common-sense policing
and on the side of the British people.
(Haltemprice and Howden)
(Con)
Everybody in the House will share the Home Secretary’s laudable
aim of cutting knife crime. However, she will remember that when
we debated the new stop-and-search powers—I think it was the day
after the Casey report came out—I cited some examples from that
report where police officers had justified carrying out a search
based on the person’s ethnicity alone, had been rude or uncivil
while carrying out the search, or had used excessive force,
leaving people, often young people, humiliated and distressed and
thus damaging trust in the Met. Casey called for a “fundamental
reset” of the Met’s use of stop-and-search powers. At the time, I
took it that the Home Secretary agreed with the Casey report. Can
she tell the House how what she is proposing today, which may
have considerable merit, takes on board that reset? How has she
absorbed that reset into what she is doing today?
This Government and I fully support the police in the fair use of
stop and search to crack down on violent crime and to protect
communities. Every knife taken off our streets is potentially a
life saved. That is the value that stop and search brings to
fighting crime. Today’s announcement brings together a series of
measures, including an obligation to do more reporting and a
greater increase in the data—something that has been commented on
by previous inspectors and reports—so that we have a clearer
picture of the use and efficacy of stop and search. Guidance will
be issued by the College of Policing, but already we have seen an
improvement in accountability and in scrutiny and, as a result, a
fall in the number of complaints.
Madam Deputy Speaker ( )
I call the Chair of the Home Affairs Committee.
(Kingston upon Hull North)
(Lab)
In 2021, the Home Affairs Committee inquiry into how much
progress had been made in tackling racism in policing since the
landmark Stephen Lawrence inquiry found, as a cross-party
Committee, that the disproportionate use of stop-and-search
powers against black people was even greater than it had been
when Sir William’s inquiry concluded 22 years earlier. No
evidence provided to the Committee adequately explained or
justified the nature and scale of racial disproportionality in
the use of stop-and-search powers. That has damaged confidence in
the tactic and in policing by consent.
Of course, stop and search is a valid policing tactic, as the
Home Secretary said, but it must be used in a focused and fair
way, and underpinned by an evidence base. Can she explain what
evidence base she is drawing on when she says that police forces
need to “ramp up” the use of stop-and-search powers? Will she
commit to commissioning a fully independent and comprehensive
study of the efficacy of stop-and-search tactics, and to
undertaking an equality impact assessment on this new policy?
As I mentioned in my statement, the Department is trialling a
more sophisticated approach to calculating disparity, with a
focus on the Metropolitan Police Service. That has produced a
useful analysis based on actual suspects of violent crime, rather
than the totality of usual residents of an area, as a denominator
for calculating the rates of stop and search. It is experimental,
but the data emerging from that advanced study demonstrates that
disparity ratios are significantly reduced for black people
compared with the traditional method, falling from 3.7 to 1.2.
That is an emerging evidence base upon which policy will be
made.
(Wokingham) (Con)
I strongly support the Home Secretary’s further measures to cut
the unacceptable loss of life from violent crime. Will she
confirm that her statement is part of a much wider strategy to
tackle the underlying causes and problems, as well as the use of
weapons?
My right hon. Friend is absolutely right: stop and search is one
tool in our armoury in the fight against violent crime. We have
increased police resources and broader police powers; we have
continued funding for our violence reduction units, which bring
together local partners to tackle the drivers of violent crime in
their area; we are working on piloting serious violence reduction
orders; we have rolled out knife crime prevention orders; and we
have been working intensively with all agencies to ensure that
they prioritise such crime and take appropriate action.
(Hackney North and Stoke
Newington) (Ind)
The Home Secretary spoke about black mothers. I am a black
mother, and I know very many black mothers: they are my friends,
my relatives and my constituents. I have represented an
inner-city constituency for nearly 40 years. Will the Home
Secretary explain to the House how her statement meets the
long-standing concerns of black mothers not just about the
tragedy of a life lost, but about the use of suspicionless
powers, and how, as was asked earlier, it fits in with the Casey
review?
As I said, the use of stop and search is, at its core, about
saving lives and preventing crime—that is what it is about. I
have been incredibly encouraged and reassured by the evidence
emerging from local forces. In Manchester, for example, Chief
Constable Stephen Watson has said that a 260% increase in the use
of stop and search over a defined period correlated with a 50%
reduction in firearms discharges and a fall in the number of
complaints. I think there is a concerted effect to improve and
increase the way in which stop and search is applied. It must be
applied judiciously, proportionately and legitimately, but it is
a vital tool in saving lives.
(New Forest West) (Con)
Of the 220,000 arrests, how many were for repeat offences, and of
those, how many resulted in a custodial sentence?
My right hon. Friend makes a very good point. That is exactly why
we are piloting serious violence reduction orders, which empower
the police to place an order on an individual who already has a
conviction for a knife-related offence and give police greater
powers to stop them should they breach the terms of their order.
The initial reports are very positive about the way this extra
power is being used by the police.
(Brent Central) (Lab)
Maya Angelou said:
“When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first
time.”
The Home Secretary has showed us who she is time and again. Just
9% of stop and searches yield offensive weapons or items linked
to burglary. No other organisation would ramp up something that
yielded a result of only 9%. Scotland was the knife capital of
the UK. It reduced its knife crime by 69% by using a public
health approach. Why is the Home Secretary not using a public
health approach?
I disagree with the hon. Lady’s characterisation. Last year, stop
and search resulted in almost 67,000 arrests and removed around
14,900 weapons and firearms from our streets. Crime statistics
show that increased use of stop and search is driving the
continuing increase in police-recorded
possession-of-bladed-weapon offences, helping the police to save
lives. Obviously, we work with all agencies, because stopping
crime needs a multidimensional, multi-agency approach. That is
what our violence reduction units are all about; that is what our
Grip funding is all about; that is what our safer streets funding
is all about—bringing together all the relevant agencies to
prevent crime in the first place.
(East Worthing and Shoreham) (Con)
I agree with the Home Secretary’s support for stop and search
when it is used skilfully and responsibly, but when the all-party
parliamentary group for children did some work on this a few
years ago, we found that an alarming number of under-10-year-olds
were being stopped and searched, and that police procedures for
younger children were not being used properly. What assurances
can she give me that things have changed and that, in particular
for sensitive, younger children, stop and search is used only in
extremis and under controlled circumstances?
There are clear legal limits around the use of stop and search,
and it is only applicable for over-18s—the section 60 power. It
is vital that the police understand the use of the legal limits,
and that is why I am glad that training in procedural justice has
improved. The authorised professional practice issued by the
College of Policing will include greater detail on the limits and
on how police officers should exercise their powers. The use of
body-worn video footage has been a game changer in improving the
accountability and transparency of how the power is used. That is
why we are seeing a fall in the number of complaints.
(Twickenham) (LD)
I am a London MP, and my community has felt the effect of young
lives being tragically lost to knife crime. Some innocent
teenagers and black and mixed-race people in my constituency tell
me they feel that they have a target on their back for stop and
search. With knife crime having risen 65% since 2015 at the same
time as suspicionless stop and search has hugely expanded, and
with the IOPC itself saying that suspicionless stop and search
undermines confidence in the police, why does the Home Secretary
once again insist on policy by press release for such complex,
sensitive issues instead of focusing on the hard yards of
properly resourced community policing based on intelligence
gathering to prevent and solve crimes?
I do not accept that. Of course, there is nothing that any of us
can say to someone who has lost a loved one to knife crime that
will make it better, but tackling serious violence is an absolute
priority for this Government, and we are making progress. Since
2010, serious violent crime has fallen by 41%. Our approach has
been twin track, combining tough law enforcement such as
intensive police patrols in hotspot areas of violence and ramping
up the use of stop and search with a more long-term strategy to
engage more young people and steer them away from a life of
violence. Operation Sceptre, which was recently rolled out
through many forces, focuses on knife crime and on using powers
proactively, and it has had very good results in many forces when
it comes to the seizure of offensive weapons.
(Cities of London and
Westminster) (Con)
Obviously, stop and search can play a big role in keeping people
safe on the streets, but it has to be part of a much wider
strategy, particularly encouraging young people not to carry a
knife in the first place. Would my right hon. and learned Friend
consider encouraging police forces up and down the country to use
knife wands, which can prove more helpful for those who are being
searched and for those searching, and be less intrusive in the
whole process?
We have a range of orders, and one of them is being piloted—the
serious violence reduction order. If there is any doubt about
what I said, let me clarify: SVROs are for over-18s, but section
60s can be used on anyone, including under-18s. Let me just be
clear about that.
SVROs are aimed at providing a targeted tool for the police. They
are being piloted at the moment, so that anyone who has a
conviction for a knife-related offence can be subject to a
specific order that will enable and empower the police to stop
them more quickly, and therefore prevent crime should that person
breach the terms of their order.
(Birmingham, Selly Oak)
(Lab)
The Home Secretary talked in her statement and in her answers
about the benefits of body-worn camera footage. What percentage
of current stop-and-search operations are actually filmed by
officers wearing body cameras?
We know that the use of body-worn video has increased
dramatically throughout police forces, and it is now a
significant element in the transparency and accountability.
Several layers of scrutiny and challenge are injected into the
system these days, whether that is internal supervision, internal
feedback, the stop-and-search scrutiny panels, or various other
inspections. Body-worn video footage can inform the training and
accountability, and that is one reason why there are greater
levels of public confidence in stop and search and a lower number
of complaints.
(Don Valley) (Con)
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement. Suspicionless
stop and search must be used responsibly, but does she agree that
any Members who think that that tactic is wrong should speak with
officers who have had to deliver the news to a mum or a dad that
their son has been stabbed?
My hon. Friend puts it very well. The police—our frontline
partners who are dealing with this issue day in, day out; who
have to break that tragic news to parents, every parent’s worst
nightmare—report back that stop and search, when used lawfully,
proportionately and reasonably, is a vital tool in the fight
against crime and is fundamentally very effective in saving
lives.
(Walthamstow) (Lab/Co-op)
Frankly, I hope that my residents in Walthamstow are not
listening to this statement, because it is just plain offensive
to those of us at the heart of this challenge. Just a few weeks
ago, I got up to ask the Prime Minister about a 16-year-old boy
murdered in my community outside his school, and another
16-year-old in court charged with that murder. This weekend, last
night, I was sat with residents, having an emergency residents’
meeting because we had had a serious shooting in my
community—another young man, critical but stable in hospital.
None of my residents would dispute the role that stop and search
can play, but we are all arguing—begging, pleading—for this
Government to recognise the epidemic of youth violence in our
country. If the Home Secretary cares about these young people, as
she says she does, she should invest in their future. Under her
Government, investment in youth services has plummeted from £158
per head to just £37. I asked the Prime Minister to make this
issue one of his national priorities, but he ignored the
question. Will the Home Secretary do something different and put
her budget into correcting that deficit?
I am very proud of what this Government have achieved when it
comes to law and order. We have falling crime; we have a record
number of police officers—ever, in the history of policing; this
financial year alone, we have put over £100 million into tackling
serious violence; and since 2019, 136,000 violent offences have
been prevented in places operating Government initiatives. That
is thousands of lives saved and thousands of violent incidents
prevented. I only wish the hon. Lady would welcome that.
(Blackpool South) (Ind)
Despite the Government’s efforts to free up the time of frontline
police officers by reducing the amount of bureaucracy and
paperwork, which takes up more and more of their time, officers
often say to me that this increases year on year and so reduces
the amount of time they can spend on the beat. What steps are the
Government taking to cut out the paperwork and free up frontline
time to keep our communities safe?
My hon. Friend raises a very good point. One of the big
programmes of work that I am leading at the Home Office relates
to freeing up police time and reducing bureaucracy, so that
police officers are unencumbered to fight crime and respond to
the public’s priorities. That is why we have announced changes to
the way police officers will interact with health partners when
it comes to mental health incidents. We are reforming the Home
Office counting rules, which will save thousands of hours in
avoiding duplicative or unnecessary recording of crime. We have a
programme of reform to help to empower the police so that they
can better respond to the priorities that the British people
have.
(Streatham) (Lab)
The Minister talked about common-sense policing, but I have to
ask what sense she applied when making a statement about
suspicionless stop and search while making no reference to the
well-evidenced racist discriminatory use of it. Does she not
think we should be focusing on solutions that would actually make
communities like mine safer, like reversing education cuts,
ending school exclusions, improving mental health services and
taking people out of poverty? If she has already said that the
police have the powers necessary, why is she arguing that they
have greater powers for this particular practice, which actually
leads to less confidence in policing?
I do not consider the use of stop and search, when done lawfully,
to be racist. What I do consider to be disproportionate and
unjustifiable is that black people are four times more likely to
be murdered than white people and that young black men are more
likely to be victims of crime than young white men. That is the
disproportionality, that is the disparity I am working to
stop.
(Dwyfor Meirionnydd)
(PC)
Last year, a response to a freedom of information request
revealed that the gap in the stop and search rates between white
people and black people was greater in Wales than in England. We
do not know the latest rates, however, as the Home Office does
not provide regular Wales-specific data on stop-and-search rates
by population. Before the Home Secretary pushes for further use
of stop and search in Wales, will she commit to regularly
publishing Wales-specific data so we can properly understand the
effect of this policy on our communities?
My announcement today is all about increasing the levels of data
that are reported by police forces so that we can have a clearer
picture of exactly how these important powers are being used.
(Slough) (Lab)
Across our country, including in my Slough constituency, knife
crime is up by 70% compared with seven years ago, but,
shockingly, there is only a 1% success rate in terms of the
policies of the Home Secretary. She is today asking the police to
ramp up the use of stop and search but, as I have said, in terms
of the conviction rate, there is only a 1% success rate.
Meanwhile, we have had funding to youth centres
slashed—decimated—over the last decade, so is the Home Secretary
embarrassed by the failures of Conservative Government policies
over the last 13 years, and can she explain why black people are,
despairingly, nine times more likely to be stopped and searched
than everybody else?
I listen to frontline police officers and I look at the data when
I make policy, and the police tell us that stop and search is a
vital tool to crack down on criminals and to protect communities.
Sir Mark Rowley, earlier this year, said he had countless
examples of offenders being discovered to have dangerous weapons,
tools for burglary or drugs on their person that have been
uncovered by his officers being in the right place at the right
time, and using this important power. These are examples and this
is evidence of the utility of stop and search.
(Vauxhall)
(Lab/Co-op)
The framing of knife crime as a black issue is frankly lazy and a
dangerous narrative. We need to work with all our communities to
understand the core issues around the root cause of crime, and
why some of our young people feel that they need to carry a
knife. Some of them are victims. I want all my Vauxhall
constituents to feel safe and go about their daily business, but
stop and search on its own is a blunt tool. The Independent
Office for Police Conduct found that a single black boy was
searched 60 times—60—between the ages of 14 and 16, leaving him
fearful of the police. No Member of the House will think that is
an effective use of police time, so can the Home Secretary
outline what measures she is taking to end what the IOPC found is
the “disproportionate impact” of stop and search on black, Asian
and minority ethnic people?
As I said, it is vital that stop and search is used judiciously,
carefully, reasonably and proportionately, and that there is
effective community engagement and scrutiny. There are today more
layers of scrutiny and challenge than ever before on the use of
that particular power—internal supervision, first and foremost;
internal feedback on each stop and search, depending on the
force; stop and search scrutiny panels, chaired either by a
member of the community, or by Police and Crime
Commissioners inspectorate observations; and internal force
professional standards investigations when there is a complaint.
That is why we are seeing higher levels of confidence and lower
levels of complaint.
(Oldham East and
Saddleworth) (Lab)
Will the Home Secretary commit to an independent evaluation of
her proposals, with particular emphasis on the impact on
confidence in policing among marginalised minority communities
and on community relations?
What I hear from chief constables is that there has been much
needed awareness of the impact on different communities.
Therefore, in many forces, there has been an improvement in the
way outreach has been conducted, and much more respect with
communities and to communities that may be affected by the use of
these powers. The 2021 inspectorate report noted that there had
been an improvement in engagement and training by forces. We
should welcome that.
(Liverpool, Riverside)
(Lab)
Institutional racism is a fact. It is also a fact that stop and
search is not used proportionately or sensibly. Liberty has said
that stop-and-search powers are “ineffective” and
“discriminatory”, disproportionately impacting on black
communities. These powers will worsen existing divisions between
police and communities when public trust and confidence in the
police is at a serious low. So can the Home Secretary confirm
what evidence she has that ramped up stop and search will tackle
serious violent crime?
In her inspectorate report of 2021, Wendy Williams confirmed that
the majority of stop-and-search decisions were based on
“reasonable grounds” —that is the legal test. She said that most
forces have “good external scrutiny arrangements” and that forces
are “better at monitoring” the use of stop and search, compared
with previous years. She said that training has improved. That is
the evidence I find encouraging.
(Brentford and Isleworth)
(Lab)
Policing by consent depends on trust and confidence in the
police. Officers are increasingly stopping law-abiding young
people, under the spurious claim that they “smell cannabis” when
none has been smoked or is present. And then the police are
refusing to provide the necessary receipts and documents to those
they have stopped. That failure to follow guidelines is
shattering the trust that young people have in the police. What
is the Home Secretary doing to address that?
I fundamentally disagree with the hon. Lady’s proposition. Stop
and search can be used in the case of drugs and it is largely
used in those instances. It is a vital tool in the fight against
drug possession and supply and it can prevent young people from
falling into the spiral of drugs.
(Kingston upon Hull West and
Hessle) (Lab)
Why on earth does the Home Secretary think it is a good idea, in
a free and democratic country, to encourage more section 60
searches, known as suspicionless powers, which allow an
individual to be stopped without cause, without need and without
reasonable suspicion, instead of adopting a targeted,
intelligence-led approach? Is it because of a lack of
intelligence in the Home Office?
Simply put, it is because such searches prevent crime and save
lives.
(Strangford) (DUP)
I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement. The use of stop and
search has been raised with me during an ongoing feud in my
constituency, yet the Police Service of Northern Ireland has used
stop and search as an effective tool to combat the transport and
sale of illegal drugs, to take lethal weapons off the streets and
to find evidence of criminal activity. Will the Home Secretary’s
advice to police forces on the mainland be extended to our police
in Northern Ireland? They live under a high threat level and need
the legal ability for stop and search to be fully understood and
endorsed. If not, will she ask her colleague the Secretary of
State for Northern Ireland to make this messaging crystal clear
in Northern Ireland too?
As the hon. Gentleman will know, I cannot speak for the PSNI.
Since the county lines programme was launched in England and
Wales in 2019, police activity has resulted in more than 3,500
lines closed, 10,000 arrests and 5,700 safeguarding referrals,
all linked to drug offences. That is a success story and we must
keep going.
|
