Commons Petition
on Stalking advocates
(Chesterfield) (Lab): I
rise to present this petition on the subject of stalking
advocates. In June 2021, my constituent Gracie Spinks was
murdered by somebody who had been stalking her for a considerable
time. The murder absolutely shocked Chesterfield to its
foundations, and her funeral brought the town to a standstill. In
the light of that appalling event, my constituent Jackie
Barnett-Wheatcroft brought together a petition, which was signed
by over 17,500 people, on the issue of stalking advocates. It was
a paper petition that was rushed out shortly after the appalling
murder, and it did not comply with the exact terms of
parliamentary petitions. Subsequently, an e-petition was
formed—we have debated it today—which 100,000 people have signed.
I also wanted to present a petition in Parliament, which I do
today, signed by 204 of my constituents.
The petition reads:
“The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge
the Government to consider the concerns of the petitioners and
take immediate action to reallocate funds to provide additional
funding for stalking advocates in order to support victims of
stalking.”
Following is the full text of the petition:
[The petition of residents of the United Kingdom,
Notes that the 2019/20 Crime Survey for England and Wales
estimated that 3.6% of adults aged 16-74 experienced stalking in
the last year, equivalent to an estimated 1.5 million victims,
977,000 women and 526,000 men; declares that stalking advocates
for victims of stalking are invaluable due to the specialist
independent support, advice and advocacy that they provide;
further that stalking advocates provide victims with a main point
of contact and support throughout their journey; further that
additional funding for stalking advocates to work with victims of
stalking would help support victims; further that increased
support would prevent unnecessary distress and suffering of
victims and their families; and further that additional support
should also be given to police to allow cases to be investigated
more thoroughly, possibly preventing threats to life.
The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge
the Government to consider the concerns of the petitioners and
take immediate action to reallocate funds to provide additional
funding for stalking advocates in order to support victims of
stalking.
And the petitioners remain, etc.]
Westminster Hall debate
on Stalking Advocates
4.30pm
(in the Chair)
Before I call the hon. Member for Gower () to open the debate, I
wish to make a short statement about the sub judice resolution. I
have been advised that the petition being debated today directly
relates to the death of Gracie Spinks in June last year. An
investigation by the Independent Office for Police Conduct is
ongoing, and the inquest relating to the death of Gracie Spinks
remains active. Mr Speaker has agreed to exercise the discretion
given to the Chair in respect of the resolution on matters sub
judice to allow limited reference to the death of Gracie Spinks.
However, I ask that Members do not refer to the detailed
speculation about the circumstances surrounding the death,
including the conduct of the police in this case.
I remind Members to observe social distancing, and to wear masks.
I invite to move the motion.
4.31pm
(Gower) (Lab)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered e-petition 593769, relating to
funding for stalking advocates.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Mark. As you
say, this case is sub judice, so I will not go into details in my
contribution. However, I pay heartfelt tribute to the parents of
Gracie Spinks, who are here. I spoke to Richard and Alison last
week, and was very moved by their story, but also angered. The
trauma that they have gone through is unimaginable, and I hope
that I am able to do them and Gracie proud today.
I also put on record my thanks to Jackie Barnett-Wheatcroft for
starting this important petition, and for taking the time to
speak to me last week. The petition, which has more than 105,000
signatures, states:
“The Government should provide more funding for stalking
advocates for victims of stalking. This would help support
victims, and should also help the police to investigate cases
more thoroughly, potentially helping prevent threats to
life.”
That seems a wholly appropriate way to deal with this issue, and
there must be best practice that can be shared between police
forces to make sure that the tragedy we are talking about cannot
happen again. When I spoke to Richard and Alison, and to Jackie
last week, one thing that struck me was their determination to
find a solution to this issue.
Gracie’s case is a tragic reminder of what seems to be the
ever-rising problem of violence against women and girls. Gracie
had reported her stalker to the police, which, as we know, takes
a huge amount of courage. What I am about to outline is not
specifically about Gracie’s case, but there may be some
similarities with it. Many women are dismissed by the police when
they report violence perpetrated by men. Time and again, we have
seen cases of women murdered by men who they have recently or
previously complained about. Just this week, Yasmin Chkaifi was
killed by her ex-husband. He had an interim stalking protection
order against him, and was wanted by the police for breaking it,
but despite this, he still found the opportunity to kill Yasmin
in the street, just yards from her home—her safe place. In
Swansea, we have seen the smirking face of Stephen Hill, who beat
his girlfriend so badly that she needed a metal plate put in her
head. He was given a sentence of just over two years—two years
for life-changing injuries.
This is not the first time that I have spoken about violence
against women. Just a few months ago, we were in this Chamber
debating the rise in drink spiking, and over the past 12 months,
we have been inundated with stories of serious attacks on, and
murders of, women across the country. We have rightly been
appalled by the murder of Sarah Everard at the hands of a
policeman; the police’s taking photographs of sisters Bibaa Henry
and Nicole Smallman after they were murdered in a park; and the
killing of Sabina Nessa as she walked through her local park. It
cannot go on like this. The Government must recognise that we
have an epidemic on our hands.
When women approach the police for support, they are often turned
away and made to feel as though they are wasting police time. If
someone is mugged or burgled, they are not asked to provide
evidence, but a victim of stalking is. The onus is put on the
victim. Many stalkers are also guilty of other crimes against
their victims. Affray, criminal damage, voyeurism and other
offences are often recorded in stalking cases. If a stalking
advocate were on a police force, a link between those offences
could be established, and we could avoid such cases as those that
we are talking about today.
Much is made of postcode lotteries, but we have a police force
lottery when it comes to imposing stalking protection orders. It
appears that some forces are using them to much better effect
than others. We need to ensure that their use to good effect is
replicated. A BBC investigation in March 2021 found that only two
full orders had been granted in the whole of Wales since the
introduction of stalking protection orders in January 2020,
despite more than 3,000 stalking offences being reported to the
four police forces. It is paramount that we find out how some
forces are protecting women; that information then needs to be
shared across the board. Much of this comes down to the training
that officers receive. How are police forces learning from their
mistakes and improving outcomes for all victims of stalking?
There are also issues with trivialising the crime of stalking. I
know that I have used the verb to describe having a nose at
somebody on social media, and that is not acceptable. It makes it
a bit of a joke, when we know that it is not, and we must all
recognise that. The dangers that social media can pose cannot
continue to go unchecked. We have become so much more connected.
That is great for staying in touch with family and friends, but
it exposes us to the dangers of having our details available to
the world. Posting photos, checking into places and keeping
location services on are tools that can be used to find people.
Where there are no checks on people setting up accounts, stalkers
can create numerous accounts and use them to bombard victims with
messages.
Just last week, stories were emerging about the new threat of
people using Apple AirTags to follow women without their consent.
Tracking devices such as AirTags and Tile are designed to be
attached to things that we may lose, such as ours keys or bag, so
that we can locate them from our phone, but in the wrong hands
they are the ideal tools for stalking and locating someone.
Stories emerged last week of that happening in America, and of
women having to rely on a beep from the offending device. Even
more worryingly, only 100,000 Android users out of a potential 3
million have downloaded an app that Android users are being asked
to install that identifies such tracking devices.
Safety concerns about devices and technologies used in the home,
such as smart speakers giving away someone’s location, or smart
devices getting hacked and compromising home security, have not
yet been addressed properly by the tech giants. They need to step
up and take action. They have a duty of care to everyone using
their products and services. I am not sure whether the Minister
has had conversations with any of them, but I would welcome their
engagement on the issue, and would be interested in hearing more
about how she will approach that. I thank her for her engagement
on the subject after I sent over questions earlier. We want and
need a constructive discussion. I know that she has met the
petitioner, Jackie, but I hope that she will agree to meet the
family, and other families, to discuss the best way forward.
In the meantime, very simply there are a number of questions that
I, and I am sure the family and friends of Gracie and many
others, would appreciate the answers to. How many stalking
prevention orders have been given out since they were introduced?
Are they uniformly spread across all police forces, or are some
doing better than others? What assessment has been made of the
pilot scheme being run by West Midlands police? Has the Minister
discussed with Government colleagues and police representatives
the introduction of stalking advocates to police forces in order
to deal with the issue? We would also like to know whether there
has been an audit of other offences recorded against perpetrators
who are later convicted of stalking. It is those red flags that
could stop women such as Gracie being murdered.
The themes running through my research on this subject were that
police forces need to share best practice in a much more
structured and regulated way, and that training across all forces
needs to be massively improved—although “massively” does not go
far enough. The Minister needs to take a strong lead on these
issues, and shadow Front-Bench Members and I are willing to help
in any way we can. I echo the calls in the petition for an
advocate on each police force to be made available to victims of
stalking. Patterns of behaviour can be identified if someone is
looking for them, but many police forces simply do not have the
time to do that.
Women want to feel safe, but we do not. Just look at this case,
and look at the number of women killed in the last 12 months.
Every year, my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Yardley
() on the Front Bench reads out
the number and names of the women killed at the hands of men that
year. It is a stark reminder to all of us that we are not getting
any better on this, and that we need to address the issue. Look
at the conviction rates for rape that have just been released.
Look at the Met’s response to the Sarah Everard vigil. As a
country, we must do better, and I want to work with the Minister
across the House to make sure that happens. Gracie’s parents have
made it clear that they will not let this go; I will not let it
go, either. Things must change. I will continue to fight for
women everywhere who are suffering at the hands of men.
4.42pm
(Bolsover) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark. It
is an absolute pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Gower
(), who already knows that
she is one of my favourite Members of the House. She gave an
exceptional and incredibly powerful speech. I fully endorse her
comments on best practice and advocates in police forces, and,
indeed, the questions she raised. She opened the debate in a
really suitable and fitting way.
This debate comes after a horrible event took place in the
constituency of my neighbour, the hon. Member for Chesterfield
(Mr Perkins), who is present. My hon. Friend the Member for North
East Derbyshire () is in the Gallery; I know that this issue is very
close to his heart, and that he wishes he could speak in the
debate, although his role on the Front Bench prevents him from
doing so. Hopefully, I will do him justice as well.
Victim support is important, and fostering an open and honest
culture around stalking, domestic abuse and sexual violence, so
that victims feel safe to come forward, is a massive challenge,
particularly in areas that are a bit more rural and where
education levels are perhaps not quite where we would like them
to be. We need well-resourced, locally engaged police forces to
protect communities such as those in Bolsover.
I offer my sincerest thanks to Jackie Barnett-Wheatcroft for
setting up this petition. I know it must have been very difficult
to speak so publicly, and it really demonstrates her courage and
strength of character that she has brought about this debate with
her activism. I should also say that I have met the Minister to
discuss these issues, and I know that she takes them incredibly
seriously. I know that she will be able to go only so far in her
response, and that there is a big cultural issue that we need to
address. She is incredibly committed to ensuring that we make
progress in this field. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for
Birmingham, Yardley (), is perhaps the most vocal
and passionate Member of the House on a matter that we all care
about very much.
The fact that Gracie Spinks’s death took place in a neighbouring
constituency is reflected in the number of signatures—nearly
6,000—from my Bolsover constituency. That shows the strength of
local feeling. I have been a Member of this House for two years
and one month. The Petitions Committee has been functioning in
various iterations during the covid pandemic, and every week I
have watched on with envy as all the emails come through for
different petitions, because Bolsover has never appeared in the
list of most supportive constituencies. That number of signatures
really shows how important this issue is to my constituents, so I
thank the petitioners.
We are here to talk about the lessons learned and the need for
further action. It is an incredibly difficult thing to talk
about, and I appreciate that matters being sub judice means that
we are unable to go into detail, but Gracie Spinks’s case is not
the only high-profile case to have impacted my constituency. In
another serious incident, in Tibshelf, the police were able to
enforce a restraining order in a robust and effective response.
Such incidents are harrowing ordeals for all involved, and
effective intervention can and will save lives and protect our
families, friends, neighbours and daughters.
I am a Conservative Back Bencher, so I want to make some defence
of the Government, who are trying to take action on this matter.
It is staggering, however, that 1.5 million people have suffered
stalking in the past year; the number is almost unfathomable. I
appreciate that it is not just men who engage in stalking—that is
a perfectly fine caveat—but there is a challenge around
masculinity and malehood, and a culture around being a man that
can be deeply corrosive and that needs to be challenged. It is
not a bad thing to be a man and sometimes not know the answers. I
appreciate that I am a man, albeit a gay one, and some people
will not like that, but hey.
There is challenge in being a man in a culture in which we are
exposed to things on the internet that we were perhaps not
exposed to before; in which we are challenged by culture from
different sources; and in which we may not be as educated as we
need to be. There is often a lack of role models, and a lack of
people who can say, “No, that is not right.” There is a challenge
around that. It is not impossible to overcome, but we must
undoubtedly focus on and acknowledge it, and we must present
pathways to ensure that it does not escalate to a point where
women and girls are threatened.
Does the hon. Gentleman agree that education in our schools on
consent and relationships is key? The best time to get the
message across about good, healthy relationships and how to deal
with everybody is the time between a person’s being a small child
and their becoming an adult.
I agree wholeheartedly. Indeed, until not long ago, my husband
worked for an organisation that used to go into schools to help
spread tolerance and understanding—albeit in a slightly different
field—to ensure that people were comfortable from a young age
with those conversations, their rights, and people who may be a
bit different. That is incredibly important.
This is an aside that I did not intend to make, but I visited
Bolsover School only a couple of weeks ago, and I was absolutely
blown away by the tolerance and understanding that I saw there.
It was a sign of progress from when I was at school, and a sign
that things were being challenged that I did not think would be
in my adult life. The subject that we are discussing inevitably
leads us to focus on the bad, but it is important that we
highlight and praise progress, because that encourages other
schools and people to step forward and learn.
I thank the hon. Member for being generous with his time. It is
great to see progress in schools, and that progress should be
celebrated. But is he concerned about the online harm to which
children are being exposed—about what the web is offering them
and the problems that that causes? And does he agree that that is
why the online harms Bill will have to deal with those issues
robustly?
I absolutely do. We seem to be in general agreement, which may be
more worrying for my Whips than anybody else. Obviously, the
shadow Minister who is responsible for the online harms Bill is
very much a mutual friend of ours. The question of what is
accessible on the internet is worrying in a variety of lights,
but critical thought and being able to understand what is normal
and what is right are also important. It is incredibly important
for that to be taught in a variety of fields in the 21st century.
That ranges from everything that we do and discuss here and
everything that we see in the news, through to how we behave in
relationships.
I find some of these issues incredibly difficult to discuss,
because I grew up in an abusive household. I have spoken about it
in the past. I was a victim of domestic abuse—I had an incredibly
abusive stepfather—when I was younger. I perhaps come at the
subject from the viewpoint that nobody is perfect. I have
struggled to define myself as an adult male and, not wishing to
make a huge thing of my sexuality, as an openly gay male in
Doncaster as well and to find my place. I understand that some of
those things are a great challenge for any person, but being a
role model, encouraging people to be the best that they can be
and, as the hon. Member for Gower rightly says, ensuring that the
pathways are there and that the things that people are looking at
online are challenged in the correct way is really important.
I got waylaid by the intervention. Fortunately, we have a
90-minute debate and not many speakers, so if I may, I will
return to a point that I wanted to make as an aside. Quite
recently, we had another event, in Langwith in my constituency,
and it resulted in a very high-profile murder. Derbyshire police
were incredibly impressive in how they handled that, how they
dealt with the community and how they briefed individuals. There
are moments when we are very proud of our local police force, and
I think it is only right to highlight in this discussion the fact
that there is good as well as bad.
It is also worth stating that the Government have, I think, open
ears and are very determined to take whatever suggestions will
work. That is really important. There is £151 million for victim
and witness support, but the most important bit of money that is
being spent is the £3 million to understand better the social
causes of violence against women and girls, because there are
underlying issues of education and culture, some of which have
been alluded to both in the opening remarks and in our general
discussion, that I think are really important to tackle.
Therefore I thank very much those who brought forward and signed
the petition, and I look forward to future contributions—I am
sure that that of the hon. Member for Chesterfield (Mr Perkins)
will be in a similar vein. The issue definitely should not be
party political, because our women and girls are far too
important for us to toss it around as a political football. It
should unite the nation and unite us as politicians, because this
problem must end. Those of us who have been victims, in whichever
form, know the importance of standing up, and of seeing people
stand up collectively, so I very much look forward to hearing the
Minister’s views as well. We need to work together to tackle a
culture that must end.
4.54pm
(Chesterfield) (Lab)
It is a great pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Bolsover
(), a constituency neighbour.
It is a great shame that the debate coincides with the Prime
Minister’s statement, because a number of other hon. Members
would have liked to be in the Chamber and would have been in
different circumstances. But these are the vagaries of the
political calendar, as we all know.
I start by paying tribute to Richard, Alison and the whole
family, because they have faced a grief and an anguish that is
every parent’s worst nightmare. There is almost nothing worse for
a parent than attending their child’s funeral, but to attend the
funeral of their child in such circumstances, while thinking that
steps might have been taken to prevent it, is an unspeakable
anguish that no parent should have to tolerate. They have
responded to that appalling chasm of grief by saying that they
want to get something positive out of it. They know that they
cannot bring Gracie back, but they want to support other families
so that they do not suffer the same kind of grief. That is
inspirational and it makes me very proud to have them as
constituents and friends.
I would like to pay tribute to Jackie Barnett-Wheatcroft, who
started the petition. Jackie leapt into action as soon as the
funeral had passed, initially introducing a paper petition that
was supported by the entire community and had over 17,000
signatures in a matter of weeks. Jackie counted them all, which
was quite a performance. I will be presenting a paper petition
later this evening that will also refer to that. Having being
told that a debate in Parliament needed an e-petition, Jackie
worked with the parliamentary authorities, assisted by the hon.
Member for North East Derbyshire (), to get a petition on the parliamentary system. That
has led to today’s debate.
The funeral of Gracie Spinks was attended by thousands, and her
murder sent shockwaves through the people of Chesterfield and
beyond, as the hon. Member for Bolsover said. Many people in
Chesterfield would have liked to have been here if covid
restrictions had not prevented it. The outpouring of grief and
anger that followed Gracie’s murder did not surface just because
of the tragedy of a vibrant life cut needlessly short. There was
also the sense that more could have been done to save her and
that the support a victim of stalking receives is so often
inadequate. That is what brings us to the debate today. Gracie’s
family and the wider Gracie’s law campaigners are determined that
some good must come from that appalling tragedy and that we
should all do all we can to prevent other families suffering the
same heartbreak that Gracie’s family endure daily. The petition
is an important part of that campaign.
When the petition achieved 10,000 signatures, the Government
responded and pointed out the contribution they have made to the
stalking advocacy charity Paladin. They also referred to other
stalking advocacy charities, such as the Suzy Lamplugh Trust.
They referred to the tackling violence against women and girls
strategy. I suspect that we will hear about those from the
Minister today. Just like the hon. Member for Bolsover, I will
hope that, in recognising the steps that Government have taken,
there will also be a recognition that the experience of Gracie’s
family and others tells us that far more needs to be done.
I entirely agree with what the hon. Member for Bolsover said
about cultural change and the difficulties that some men
experience in recognising their role in an everchanging world,
but there needs to be a real focus within the debate on policing,
justice, access to the courts and enforcement of the law, as well
as measures to prevent people from stalking. In advance of the
debate, I spoke to Paladin to understand more about the barriers
that victims face and to hear more what it sees as the steps that
would make a difference. Paladin explained that stalking is often
misunderstood, both by the wider public and by police forces. It
can be misrepresented as domestic violence, but in Gracie’s case,
and indeed in many cases, there has never been a relationship
between the stalker and the victim. Some victims have never even
met their stalkers. The nature of the offence is often
misunderstood and incorrectly recorded.
The nature of the stalking can often progress and change shape
and increase in its intensity and obsession. It will also often
be a series of acts, some of which are criminal offences and
others of which are not. Offences such as vandalising a victim’s
car or making malicious communications end up being recorded as a
series of individual criminal damage offences, rather than being
recognised as a collective campaign of stalking. In common with
many other crimes that take place predominantly against women,
stalking charities tell me that police often place a huge burden
of proof on victims before they start investigating, in a way
that is not expected with other crimes. When someone phones the
police to complain that they have been a victim of a house
burglary or have had their phone nicked, it is accepted as fact
that the crime they are reporting has been committed, whereas
with this sort of crime, there is an expectation that victims
will turn up armed with evidence to get an investigation going.
That frustration at the lack of investigation and detection is a
common complaint of stalking victims and their families.
Alongside the physical manifestations of stalking, the majority
of incidents often have an online aspect. That could be threats
made online, posting things that are designed to be embarrassing
or intimidatory, posting abusive messages or posting about doing
harm to a victim. That leaves a footprint, and often if police
followed up and investigated the online presence of accused
stalkers, they would identify the evidence they need. However,
because such events are often recorded as criminal damage,
malicious communications or other lesser offences, the wider
investigation simply does not happen. A lot of the evidence I
have heard and seen in this case is that if only a number of
different events had been pieced together in a single picture,
there might have been greater support for Gracie.
The petition asks the Government to increase funding to ensure
that there are people advocating for victims of stalking in every
police force. That aspect of the petition is incredibly
important, and I stress it to the Minister, because the response
given when the petition reached 10,000 signatures was
predominantly about supporting stalking advocacy charities.
Charities such as Paladin do amazing work going into police
forces and training up officers and providing a kit that officers
can use. However, we need that culture within the police—not a
junior person doing that but someone with the authority within
the force to ensure that that culture changes and that every
single police officer protects people in the ways that we should
want for our own daughters if we were reporting the issue. The
postcode lottery and inconsistency of service—both from force to
force and even within forces, depending on which officer picks up
the case—are entirely unacceptable. The need for all forces to
have a specific case manager with an appropriately senior ranking
to ensure that stalking is properly understood and appropriately
policed is urgent. I stress that when we talk about stalking
advocacy, we are talking about supporting charities, but we are
also talking about having an advocate inside police forces who
will make sure that the voices of victims are heard.
There are other aspects of the issue that we can deal with here
in this place. My hon. Friend the Member for Gower () referred to the
appallingly lenient sentences handed out in the case she
mentioned, which we have all seen. I will speak a little more in
a moment about the impact of stalking on victims, and it is
imperative that the Government recognise the physical and mental
torture of stalking on its victims, and that sentences should be
appropriately severe. It is also crucial that the backlog in
court cases is tackled, because we cannot underestimate the
number of people who go to the police and then find 12, 18 or 24
months later that offences that have been reported have still not
reached court. Often victims will say, “I simply can’t cope with
waiting for this any longer. I want it over.” As a result, they
will not go through with the process and the perpetrators will
get away with it. Often they will hear about the appalling
situation in our courts and decide not to pursue the case with
the police.
For Gracie, it was very much a case of her wanting it to stop.
She was not necessarily looking to pursue the legal aspects; she
wanted appropriate support. A whole range of victims out there
are being failed by our police, by our sentencing regime, and by
the fact that they are unable to get into court to have their
cases heard. Each is central to the question, as are all the
important points raised within the strategy about the culture,
tackling perpetrators, trying to discourage and other things. We
need to make sure that we get the policing, sentencing and court
availability right.
As I said a moment ago, there is a key role for stalking
awareness charities such as Paladin. They do great work in
improving the knowledge base of police forces, but the charitable
sector is only part of the solution. I reiterate that the
petition demands that the Government recognise the failure that
the Spinks family experienced and take action to ensure that a
culture of understanding and zero tolerance is endemic in every
police force. A specific stalking advocate within the police
force would be expected to have regular oversight of stalking
cases and ensure that officers developed the understanding and
skills that are too often lacking. Gracie Spinks’s case had the
most appalling ending imaginable—the nightmare of every parent.
Thankfully, most cases do not end in violent murder, but the
impact on all victims of stalking is profound.
Stalking victims are not free. They are constantly looking over
their shoulder and are forced, more than the rest of us, to be
careful. They go out to their car in the morning, wondering
whether it will have been attacked. They open their post,
wondering whether they will be greeted by an abusive message.
They turn on their computer, wondering what will have been posted
to them or about them. Every time they answer their phones, they
do not wonder whether it will be a payment protection insurance
salesman, but whether the anonymous number will be spouting a
torrent of hateful or disturbing abuse. They develop a habitat of
looking out for a certain car; every red Ford Fiesta gives a
victim a chill of fear if that is what they know their
perpetrator drives, until they can assure themselves that it is
not the same car. Not all victims of stalking end up in a
graveyard, but they are all scarred and it is so important that
we give them the support that they need. There are male victims
and female perpetrators of stalking, but it is predominantly a
crime committed by men against women. It is about power and
control, and although it can take many forms, its effects are
always debilitating.
The petition is of tremendous importance, as is the Minister’s
response. I was asked in a TV interview today how important the
debate was, and I had to say, “I don’t know. It’s all about the
actions that the Government take.” We all know that we are in the
process of discussing a huge number of issues in this place, and
there is a widespread desire across the political spectrum to
take action and prevent stalking. I am absolutely certain that
the Minister takes the issue as seriously as I do, but it is a
case of whether there are the necessary resources, legal backing,
sentencing support and determination to address the court
shortage, and whether we have taken all the steps that need to be
taken for us to be able to look a family in the eye and say we
have genuinely done all that we can. The petitioners demand that
the Government recognise that the steps taken so far are not
adequate, and that standards of policing must improve for
stalking victims.
We are in the later stages of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and
Courts Bill, and we are told that the Government also intend to
introduce a victims Bill. Both those Bills seem to be appropriate
vehicles to bring forward a Gracie’s law, to ensure that funding
is provided for a stalking advocate in every police force,
leading to better protection for victims of stalking, and that
those obligations on police forces are written into law.
We can never say that Gracie Spinks will be the last victim of a
stalker. Tragically, that is almost certainly not the case, but
those of us in this place can resolve to do all we can to ensure
that police forces understand the crime and have the resources to
tackle it, so that more families like Gracie’s are not left
asking, “Why wasn’t something done?”
5.10pm
(Birmingham, Yardley)
(Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark, and
to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Chesterfield (Mr Perkins)
and all the Members who have spoken.
The hardest, but most rewarding, part of my job since becoming a
Member of Parliament is getting to know the families of women and
girls taken by male-perpetrated violence against women. It is
always a total honour to meet the families. I am always totally
bowled over by their resilience and desire to change the future
for the better for other women; and Gracie’s family, and the case
of Gracie’s law, is absolutely no exception. Gracie’s law is
never going to bring people’s families back, but there is a
desire to change things so that other families will not end up
with their daughters’ names being read out on a list. I have yet
to read out Gracie’s name on the list—I will do it in March—but
we have to all do whatever we can to make sure that that list
gets shorter, not longer.
On the point made by the hon. Member for Bolsover ()—with whom it is an honour
to debate these matters—this is a totally cross-party issue.
There was a time, perhaps even when I first got here, when I may
have questioned some people’s views on these issues, and there
was certainly a time, when I started working in violence against
women and girls services, when I absolutely felt it was party
political issue, whereby some political parties—not necessarily
just the one that he is a member of—did not take it as seriously.
I do not think for a second now that that is the case or that
there is any political party in this building that does not care
about this issue. I do not doubt for a second that the Minister
cares very deeply about the issue, but it is my job—and will be
my job for the rest of time—to point out where things are going
wrong and what needs to be done about that.
Quite rightly, my hon. Friend the Member for Chesterfield pointed
out that the case on which this petition hinges was not a
domestic homicide; it was a case of an unrelated person, not an
ex-partner, and—it is almost never that I think this—those cases
can be even harder to prosecute and get action on, because there
is now at least a base understanding in most police forces now
around the idea that stalking is part of a pattern of domestic
abuse. The role of stalking in domestic homicide must also be
acknowledged, as well as the seriousness of the crime and what it
can lead to.
Half of stalkers who make threats act on them, and some of these
end in murder. Jane Monckton Smith has written extensively about
what leads up to a fatal situation from stalking. Her study of
358 criminal homicides in the UK, all of which consisted of a
female victim and a male perpetrator, revealed that stalking
behaviour was an antecedent in 94% of all murders. So this is
something very, very serious, and it is an alarm bell that should
be being rung loudly, in order for us to end the most serious of
crimes.
Between 2015 and 2017, a freedom of information request by news
platform Viceand Paladin, the stalking charity that has already
been mentioned, revealed that 60 women were murdered after they
reported their partner, their ex-partner or a stalker to the
police on grounds of domestic abuse and stalking. That is 60
women who had reported in just a two-year period. I stand here as
a Birmingham Member, and I often outline that three women are
murdered each week, on average, every year. In Birmingham, in the
last nine days three women have been murdered—or killed, should I
say. It just seems relentless. In those 60 cases in that two-year
period, those men all had a history of harming other women, yet
there was no proactive risk identification assessment or
management of the perpetrators.
A previous history of stalking or abuse and a pattern of coercive
control within a perpetrator’s relationship with his victim have
both been identified as stages in the eight-stage domestic
homicide timeline outlined by Jane Monckton Smith. In short,
stalking is an identifiable precursor to killing. We must see it
as a pattern of behaviour and it must be appropriately
identified. An intervention can save a woman’s life, and we must
ensure that reports are acted upon. The advocates that this
petition calls for would undoubtedly help that.
Just last week, as my hon. Friend the Member for Gower () has already cited, there
was the case of Yasmin Chkaifi. Without even having to go into
the sub judice of Gracie’s case—I really wish this was not the
case—there are hundreds of cases we can lean on to identify the
same failures. In the case of Yasmin, she was stabbed to death in
Maida Vale this month by Leon McCaskre. In the press it is
reported that a friend of Yasmin had said that she had received
text messages two years ago saying:
“He’s had cameras in my house recording me for months.”
Yasmin added:
“He’s stolen my mail, my phone, has access to all my personal
data. I think he will kill me. I’ve tried everything.”
The press reports that McCaskre was wanted by the police when he
killed Yasmin. The warrant saying that he should be held without
bail was issued on 4 January after he failed to appear in court.
McCaskre was accused of breaching an interim stalking protection
order.
I will come to those orders, as they have been raised. I have
worked in domestic abuse, sexual violence, stalking and human
trafficking services for a good many years. We can make up as
many good orders as we like, but an order is absolutely worthless
unless the police act on breaches of it and unless there is a
well-resourced police force that can, in that moment, go out,
investigate the breach and make an arrest that leads to somebody
being imprisoned—which, in the case of Yasmin, would have saved
her life. In my experience, when I say, “Have you ever considered
getting an order?”, this is the reaction I get: “Yeah, I’ve got
about four.” I have personally got four restraining orders; I
have been a victim of stalking and harassment. There are people
in prison and sectioned for undertaking that abuse against me;
and unsurprisingly their orders did not stop them.
There are other cases. Asher Maslin stalked and murdered Hollie
Gazzard. Myself and the Minister met Hollie’s family. Maslin was
involved in 24 violent offences, including three against Hollie,
12 against former partners, three against his mother and four
against others. There was no proactive join-up of this
information nor risk management. Ian Paton strangled Kayleigh
Hanks to death in July 2018. He had strangled three other people,
including his ex-partner, before he killed Kayleigh. There was no
risk assessment or risk management of his behaviour.
Managing repeat offenders is a real concern. Research indicates
that up to 56% of those charged with stalking go on to reoffend
after prosecution. We already know that it is a tiny fraction who
will have been prosecuted in the first place. Perpetrators’
histories are not checked, and links are not made.
Two inspections by Her Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary
revealed deeply troubling findings. Its 2014 inspection into
police responses to domestic abuse revealed no risk management of
perpetrators. In 2017, “Living in Fear”, a report specifically on
stalking produced by Her Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary
and fire and rescue services—HMIC’s name changed in the
intervening three years, and got a lot longer—revealed a 100%
failure in every police service and the Crown Prosecution Service
across the six areas it inspected. Out of 112 cases, not one case
was properly investigated, and no stalker was proactively risk
assessed or risk managed.
The most recent HMICFRS report was similarly damning. It
identified that repeat offenders in the areas of stalking,
harassment, abuse and violence against women were time and again
not being monitored, with no offender management and no
monitoring in the community of the most serious risk of harm
perpetrators. Imagine if I was talking about terrorism—imagine if
there were people like that living on your street and not being
monitored by any intelligence agency. The trouble is that when
the newspapers report these cases, the police say, “Don’t worry,
nobody else is at risk”—as if all women are not at risk from the
kind of hatred that killed Gracie.
Operation Soteria has been undertaken already at Avon and
Somerset police, and recently at the Met—we await the findings of
that when the Home Office decides that we should have them. What
was found in Avon and Somerset, and I have absolutely no doubt
also in the Met, was that when people were being accused of rape,
abuse and stalking on the streets, as well as in relationships,
police forces were routinely not even checking the accused on the
system to find out if they were a repeat offender. Imagine that:
“This man raped me.” “Maybe check it on the system.” That is a
fundamental failing, and I cannot look at these failings across
the board for every crime that women are victims of and just fall
back on the idea that it is complex. It is not that complex. It
is like burglary of a house: it is not that complex. Every woman
who comes forward and says, “I feel scared by this,” should be
listened to.
Victims have no faith in the system, and legal advocates would
without question improve that. Out of 75 victim respondents
surveyed, fewer than two thirds indicated that they had reported
stalking to the police in the UK, citing a lack of trust in the
police and the wider criminal justice system. The Suzy Lamplugh
Trust’s survey of over 1,000 officers in the UK found that only
35% of police respondents had ever received stalking-specific
training and that 10% of respondents received training over five
years ago, with only 3% indicating that they were very confident
in their knowledge of stalking legislation, while 13% were not
confident at all. Imagine that is the one who you get, who is
sent out to you—the one who is not confident in stalking
legislation at all. We need better training on stalking: 82% of
those respondents indicated that they wanted better training and
that it was needed for the police to be better equipped.
In September 2020, the University of Central Lanc—Lancashire;
sorry, I am from the midlands, not the north. I know everybody
thinks it is the same place, but it is not. The University of
Central Lancashire published “They speak for you when you can’t
speak”, an academic review of the National Stalking Advocacy
Service run by the charity Paladin. That report found that the
support of an independent stalking advocacy caseworker—the
specific kind of advocate that we are talking about—was critical
in improving the responses of criminal justice agencies. Many
victims explained how grateful they were for that advocacy and
support. High-risk victims of stalking confirmed that an ISAC’s
support increased their understanding of the nature and impact of
stalking and the associated risk. The report also said that
victims reported improved emotional wellbeing and enhanced safety
as a result of the ISAC support. The advocacy improves victims’
experiences. It is vital.
My hon. Friend the Member for Chesterfield mentioned the
Government’s response to the petition once it received 10,000
signatures. I pay massive tribute to people such as Jackie, who
are the doers of changing the law. Every single change to the law
was brought about by somebody sitting in a room saying, “This
isn’t good enough.” It is people such as Jackie and Gracie’s
family who will change the law—I have no doubt.
The £90,000 for extra stalking advocates is absolutely to be
welcomed, but it would cover only what is necessary in
Birmingham. It has been said that it is a postcode lottery across
the board in terms of support for victims of violence against
women and girls, and it is absolutely the case that in one place,
people get a great service, while in another, people get a
dreadful service.
The hon. Member for Bolsover made the point that nobody is
perfect. I wrote down that I must point out that that is
absolutely one of the best things I have ever heard a man in this
place say about violence against women and girls. As a society,
we have come to terms with the idea that we all know a victim.
With #MeToo and the Sarah Everard case, women have poured their
hearts out, with thousands more coming forward now than ever
before. Women have stood up and said, “This happens to us.” As a
society, we understand now that we all know a victim of
abuse—such as the hon. Member, who spoke about what happened to
him in childhood. It is deeply important.
However, the bit that we have not come to as a society—and we
will not stop this unless we do—is this: we all know and love a
perpetrator of violence and abuse. Statistically speaking, if we
all know the victims, then we know the perpetrators—unless there
is one very prolific, horrible man. We have to come to terms with
the idea that these people, while they do those dreadful,
monstrous things, are not necessarily the monsters they are
described as. The people who stalk, abuse, rape and beat women
and girls walk freely among us all the time. Until we can all
come to terms with that as a society, whether through education
or otherwise, cases such as Gracie’s will keep happening. We have
to accept that those people exist and that they need monitoring
and actioning. We need to listen to the voices of victims.
What my hon. Friend the Member for Chesterfield said about police
reform is vital. I was an independent sexual violence adviser;
advocates such as ISVAs have existed for 20 years and, for a good
long spell, that advocacy massively improved the conviction rate.
However, we have seen those rates tumble. Advocacy in and of
itself, without proper police prioritisation—which needs to come
from political prioritisation—is no longer enough.
As we continue to fail to monitor repeat offenders and to follow
up on case after case where people come forward, it is no longer
good enough for hon. Members to sit here and say, “We’re going to
have a strategy. It’s up to police force areas what they decide
to do.” With the greatest respect to Maggie Blyth—the officer put
in charge of tackling violence against women and girls—when I had
a meeting with her, she told me that, “I have to expect police
force areas to take it on.” She has no teeth to say, “You have to
do this, otherwise you’ll lose your job.” That has to come from
the Home Secretary.
Mr Perkins
I agree entirely with my hon. Friend. I was reading in detail the
Government’s response to the petition when it reached 10,000
signatures. It says that,
“the College of Policing provided a set of new advice products on
stalking for police first responders and call handlers, and in
November 2019 it released a new product for investigators.”
I have no doubt that they are very useful things. However, it
needs to be compulsory and it requires real leadership from the
very top of the police force that this is a priority. Instead of
it being something that officers can avail themselves of, I want
it to be something that every single officer is doing. I want to
see the recommendations acted upon.
I 100% agree. I take my hon. Friend back to my terrorism analogy:
imagine if we allowed the police to freestyle how they dealt with
terrorism—that we did not have specific tasks that police force
areas had to follow.
The same priority is never given to male violence against women.
It is never, ever considered to be the most pressing issue. More
than 20% of all police call-outs are cases of violence against
women and girls. Do we think that those cases get 20% of the
policing budget in any area? Can we all guess? I do not want to
turn this into a pantomime, Sir Mark, but I think we can all
guess that they do not get anywhere near that amount. The reality
is that this support has to be driven with the political will
shown by the 100,000 people who signed the petition. The hon.
Member for Bolsover said that he was proud that this was the
issue that mattered to his people. The country has spoken again
and again in the last two years—more so than ever before—to say,
“This issue matters to us.”
In my lifetime of working in this area, which now seems like many
lifetimes, I have never known the country to push this as an
issue of political will quite as much as it has in the wake of
Sarah Everard’s death. These things will only change when every
police force area knows that if it does not, the chief constable
will be sacked. This proposal will only work if the issue is
addressed when allocations of budgets come from the Government.
Although I like the £151 million, the Minister and I both
know—because it has been announced quite a few times over the
years—that £125 million is going to refuge accommodation and has
nothing to do with the police. It will go to local councils to
offer refuge accommodation—not necessarily to the standard that I
would like to see, but still better than nothing.
The reality is that we in this place have to say that,
crime-wise, this issue is our priority and we are going to push
it through to the bitter end, so that when a Prime Minister
stands up and says that the single most important thing a leader
can do—the first line of Government—is to ensure the safety and
security of their citizens, in their head they are remembering
that women and girls exist.
(in the Chair)
For information, the University of Central Lancashire is in
Preston, in my constituency.
5.33pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home
Department ()
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark. I
congratulate the hon. Member for Gower () on securing this debate
and doing justice to this vital subject. It really is an honour
to be here.
I thank the other Members who are present. I am sure that there
would have been more had it not been for events in the main
Chamber. Nevertheless, I thank my hon. Friend the Member for
Bolsover () and the hon. Member for
Chesterfield (Mr Perkins) for doing an extraordinary job, as men
advocating for the women and girls in their constituencies. The
hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley () and I may disagree on much,
but I think we both agree that it is heartening and inspiring to
see men coming together, because it is only when men stand up and
demand change on behalf of women that we will see the change that
we all want to see.
I also pay tribute to Jackie Barnett-Wheatcroft, who is with us
today, for creating this petition. The amount of work that she
has done to get this issue to the top of the agenda is not
inconsiderable. It was a real pleasure and honour to speak to her
and hear about her tireless efforts. She has taken this issue on
because she cares about it, and that passion came across so
clearly. It was wonderful to speak to her and my hon. Friend the
Member for North East Derbyshire (), who is also in the Gallery. As a Whip, he is not
able to speak, but he was the conduit that allowed us to have
that conversation. I pledge again that I will do everything in my
power to help Jackie with her work to set up the charity, which I
know will change people’s lives and be a massive source of
support. To Jackie, I say thank you so much.
Of course, we must honour Gracie Spinks. Her name is not
mentioned in the petition itself, but it is a tribute to her. You
have enjoined me not to transgress and go beyond what I am
allowed to say, Sir Mark, because the IOPC’s investigations mean
this is a live case, but that does not prevent me from expressing
my total shock and horror in reading about those awful events—I
know that everybody shared that feeling. The issues goes wider
than the area that Gracie comes from; constituents of mine in
Redditch have signed the petition, as have people from across the
country.
When we read about that tragic and senseless loss of life, we can
all relate to it—whether or not we are parents does not matter. I
extend my deepest sympathies and condolences to Richard and
Alison, who are in the Public Gallery. I can only begin to
imagine how terribly they must have suffered. I thank them for
the tremendous amount of work they put into the petition, which
has resulted in this hour-and-a-half discussion, and our
dedication and effort. This is only the start of the change that
they want to see.
I believe, Sir Mark, that I have enough time to set out what we
are going to do, what we have already done, and what we will
continue to do, as the petitioners have rightly requested.
(in the Chair)
I remind the Minister to leave time for the Chair of the
Petitions Committee to respond.
Thank you for that reminder, Sir Mark; I will ensure that I leave
enough time.
Stalking is at the heart of our “Tackling violence against women
and girls” strategy, which we published in July. It is worth
stepping back and reminding ourselves of why we needed that
strategy, the consultation of which received the greatest number
of responses to any Government consultation. That highlights that
need, and we must all keep fighting and pushing—I include myself
and the shadow Minister in that—to keep the issue at the top of
the priority list for Government and for Members across the
House.
We all have so many important things to focus on every day in our
lives as parliamentarians but, as the shadow Minister said, the
public care deeply about this topic, and that was reflected in
the responses to the consultation. Of course, that was an
immediate response following Sarah Everard’s death, but many
other women have died—we all know about the work that the shadow
Minister does every single year in Parliament to remind us of
those deaths—and it is right that we continue to honour the
victims in our work to take the strategy forward.
To reduce the risk of perpetrators committing further offences,
as the strategy confirmed, we launched a fund for police and
crime commissioners to run programmes to address the behaviour of
domestic abuse and stalking perpetrators. The funds will provide
programmes to cover a range of different methods for tackling
stalking. It is right that we recognise that stalking only
recently came on to the statute book in its current form. Our
understanding is not quite as well developed as it is for many
other crimes that involve serious violence against women and
girls. That is why it is important that we have those programmes
and evaluate the evidence so that we can understand what works.
That work includes the development of a multi-agency stalking
intervention project in Cambridgeshire, and the development of
the compulsive and obsessive behaviour intervention programme in
Surrey. The aim of all such programmes is to encourage
behavioural changes to reduce the frequency and gravity of the
abuse presented by the perpetrator, thereby improving the safety
of and protection for the victim.
The strategy also refers to our commitments to improve the use of
stalking protection orders. We introduced these orders just two
years ago, and they can protect victims of stalking at the
earliest possible opportunity and help to address the behaviour
of perpetrators before they become entrenched or escalate. They
have the flexibility to impose both restrictions and positive
requirements on a perpetrator, and I am proud that the Government
introduced them.
We know that there is more to do. We know that some forces have
been applying for more of these orders than others. The violence
against women and girls strategy confirmed that the Home Office
would work with the police to ensure that all forces make proper
use of the orders. That is why I have recently written to all
chief constables whose forces have applied for fewer stalking
protection orders than might have been expected to encourage them
to always consider applying for one in stalking cases.
I did that in October, and I received responses from several
forces setting out the measures they are taking to make sure
these orders are being used appropriately. I am pleased that one
of the responses I received was from Derbyshire police, which is
rightly taking a number of actions, including the delivery of a
force-wide training programme specifically for stalking
offences.
Specifically on that point, it is my understanding that as of
June 2021 stalking protection orders were used in response to
around only 2% of stalking arrests. Is the Minister expecting any
factor of increase after her letter and after the police forces
have said they are going to do this? Will it go from 2% to 4%?
Obviously, I would like to see it go higher. Is the Home Office
putting a target on police forces?
Absolutely, we want to see the number go up. We will be
publishing the figures as soon as we are able to.
This debate has rightly focused on the police response, not just
in Gracie’s case—which I am not commenting on—but generally
across the country. I want to talk about some of the things that
the police have done. The hon. Lady referenced the 2017
inspection, which showed a number of failings, to put it that
way, in the police response. Since then, forces have identified a
number of improvements that have been taken forward, and they
have published a national stalking and harassment improvement
plan.
Every force must now have a single point of contact for stalking
concerns. There is also a change in the Home Office’s crime
counting, which was mentioned by the hon. Member for
Chesterfield. Each force must ensure that stalking is recorded as
the main crime before anything else—for example, criminal damage.
I think that it is a very helpful point.
Mr Perkins
Will the Minister give way?
I will, but briefly—I do not have much time left, and I have a
lot to say.
Mr Perkins
On the question of the single point of contact, is that for the
victim or is there a single person managing the cases? If the
latter, could she tell us about the seniority of the officer?
I will respond in writing to the hon. Gentleman, because I cannot
do justice to that question in the time that I have left. I will
come back to him on that.
I want to get on record some of the other vital protections and
improvements in the police response across the country. It is
vital that the police are provided with the correct materials and
training to deal with stalking appropriately to ensure that they
are confident in identifying stalking cases. That is why new
advice and training products are being made available to police
first responders, call handlers and investigators, making clear
the key differences between stalking and harassment.
The hon. Member for Gower asked for information on the west
midlands pilot. We have confirmed £11.3 million funding for PCCs
to run programmes to address stalking and to evaluate the success
of this work. The project is in its early stages, but we will
provide her with an update from the west midlands police and
crime commissioner when we are able to.
The violence against women and girls strategy also confirmed that
the Home Office has this financial year tripled the funding that
we provide to the Suzy Lamplugh Trust, which runs the national
stalking helpline. That funding is enabling it, among other
things, to expand its advocacy work. Since July, the trust has
used the funding to provide advocacy support for 29 people who
are particularly vulnerable or whose cases are particularly
complex. I visited the helpline in November, and it was an
incredible experience to see at first hand its vital work and how
it is helping so many victims.
Hon. Members will be aware from our response to the petition last
August of the additional funding for the national stalking
helpline and of the almost £100,000 that we provided to Paladin,
which many Members mentioned. I thank Paladin for what it does.
We provided funding to it between April 2020 and March 2021 to
provide additional independent stalking advocacy caseworkers
during the height of the pandemic. The provision of ISACs trained
by Paladin is also part of the Home Office’s funding to the
Merseyside police and crime commissioner to address the behaviour
of stalking perpetrators.
In the current financial year, the Ministry of Justice will have
provided just over £150 million for victim and witness support
services, including an extra £51 million to increase support for
sexual violence and domestic abuse victims. That includes funding
for independent domestic violence advisers. Domestic abuse
funding can include stalking that takes place in a domestic
context, where the stalker might be a former partner or a family
member of the victim. It is open to police and crime
commissioners to use their core, un-ringfenced funding to fund
ISACs. The point has been made that stalking does not always take
place in a domestic violence or abuse context. It is also correct
to say that we do not ring fence funding for independent stalking
advocacy caseworkers in the same way that we do for equivalent
roles in domestic abuse and sexual violence, as the petition and
many Members have referenced.
I will move on to the work that is being led by the Deputy Prime
Minister on the victims Bill. A consultation that includes
questions about advocacy services is open, and the consultation
paper is clear that it focuses primarily on domestic abuse and
sexual violence advocates. That is because we have a more
developed understanding of those positions, Government funding
for the roles and what is needed, but we appreciate that similar
roles, such as ISACs, exist and are helpful. There are questions
in the consultation that apply equally to all advocacy services.
The consultation remains open until this Thursday, and I
encourage anyone who is interested to submit their response.
Mr Perkins
Is it the Minister’s view that the proposal made in the Gracie’s
law petition would be best applied to the victims Bill or to the
Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, or is her argument
that we do not need legislation in this area?
If the hon. Gentleman will forgive me, I am making no such
argument. On the victims Bill, I encourage him to continue his
conversations via the consultation process with the Deputy Prime
Minister and the Ministry of Justice. I am setting out the work
that the Government are doing. If the hon. Member for
Chesterfield will forgive me, I will come on to the response to
the consultation, and work that is happening across
Government.
I understand that the Minister is against the clock, but in
relation to the question that the hon. Member for Chesterfield
(Mr Perkins) just asked, will the Minister undertake to write to
the Deputy Prime Minister to make him aware of today’s debate,
and the recommendations that have been outlined by various
Members? Perhaps whether they are appropriate can then be
considered.
That is an excellent suggestion. If we have not already done so,
I will ensure that that happens. In any case, the Ministry of
Justice will look very closely at all the consultation responses
received on this issue and many others.
I will briefly touch on what is happening in terms of the
multi-agency public protection arrangements—MAPPA for
short—because they are vital. They are specifically about how
offenders are managed, which several Members have touched on. It
is important that agencies make use of MAPPA to strengthen the
effective management of serial and high-harm perpetrators of
stalking and domestic abuse, and the national MAPPA team works
closely with local strategic management boards to support
implementation at a local level. This is about having the most
appropriate arrangements in place to ensure that we keep people
safe from harm.
We are also shortly due to publish a domestic abuse strategy that
will seek to transform our response to domestic abuse in order to
prevent offending—of course, stalking is a key part of the
domestic abuse pattern of offending—support victims and pursue
perpetrators. That will include a specific section on the risks
associated with stalking. Some very good points have been raised
about the pattern of offences and the escalation process. A
couple of Members touched on education and what we are doing in
schools, and we are already working with colleagues in the
Department for Education.
I also want to let Members know that we will release a national
education campaign about violence against women and girls. This
will be quite a groundbreaking piece of work. We are talking
about changing that misogynistic culture that everyone has spoken
about, and making it absolutely clear that we probably all know a
perpetrator—not necessarily a murderer, but someone who is not
behaving in a respectful way to their female friends, associates,
colleagues or partners. This communications campaign is
specifically designed to make crystal clear what is and is not
acceptable in the public and domestic sphere. I am really looking
forward to the campaign and will pay close attention to it, as I
am sure will all hon. Members here, and I encourage them to
amplify it through their own communication channels, to get out
the message out that this Government do not put up with those
kinds of behaviours, whether they are on the street or whether
they are serious crimes such as stalking, harassment and
murder.
I once again thank the hon. Member for Gower for introducing the
debate in order to raise this important issue. I will of course
follow up on the points Members pressed me on. I could say a lot
more, but unfortunately time is short, and I want to allow the
hon. Lady the opportunity to respond to the debate.
(in the Chair)
I call , who is a member of the
Petitions Committee, not the Chair.
5.52pm
I thank the Chair for his correction; I had been elevated
quickly.
Deservedly.
I thank the hon. Gentleman.
I thank the Minister for her response, and all Members who have
spoken. It was disappointing, as we have all said, that other
Members were not able to join us in for what has been an
important debate. I thank the petition maker, Jackie, Gracie’s
family—it has been an absolute pleasure to meet you today—and
everybody who signed the petition. The Minister spoke about the
Suzy Lamplugh Trust, and my hon. Friend the Member for
Chesterfield (Mr Perkins) spoke about charities such as Paladin
that have given a lot of support. The Minister cannot respond
now, but I really hope she will hold police forces’ feet to the
fire, because we need to know that what she outlined as having
been done since 2017 is being done. It cannot be, otherwise we
would not be where we are today. It is integral that her role
incorporates holding them to account and making them act on what
they should act on.
In 1986, Suzy Lamplugh went missing. I was 15 years old at the
time, and it really sticks in the memory, as a teenager, knowing
that women are going missing. It is great to hear about the
conference, and about National Stalking Awareness Week, from 25
to 29 April, but we have to do so much more.
The petition is so important, and speaking today has been an
absolute honour. I also hope that Gracie’s sister, Abi, who I met
today, will follow her dream, go on to study politics and join
myself and other female Members in this place to fight for the
memory of her sister, Gracie. As my hon. Friend the Member for
Birmingham, Yardley () said, stalking is an
identifiable precursor to murder. Minister, we cannot allow this
not to be changed; we have to change it. She made the comparison
to terrorism. We know where our terrorists are. We tag them. We
look for them. We need to do the same as for terrorism.
I will end on this note—it is a nice note. The strength of the
feeling of the family and the petitioners must be noted. Having
two brothers myself, I was so pleased to hear Abi tell me earlier
that her brothers are great, and what a great strength they are,
because they look after her. Families are wonderful things, and
theirs has been through hell. So many families have been through
hell that it is our responsibility in the House to ensure that we
do our best so that this is never repeated. I thank the Minister
and everyone who has spoken, and I thank you, Chair.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered e-petition 593769, relating to
funding for stalking advocates.
