Asked by Baroness Benjamin To ask His Majesty’s Government what
assessment they have made of the report by the Children’s
Commissioner showing that 2,847 children, disproportionately from
black and minority ethnic backgrounds, have been strip searched by
the police since 2018. Baroness Benjamin (LD) My Lords, I beg leave
to ask a Question of which I have given private notice. In doing
so, I declare my interest as a vice-president of Barnardo’s.
The...Request free trial
Asked by
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of
the report by the Children’s Commissioner showing that 2,847
children, disproportionately from black and minority ethnic
backgrounds, have been strip searched by the police since
2018.
(LD)
My Lords, I beg leave to ask a Question of which I have given
private notice. In doing so, I declare my interest as a
vice-president of Barnardo’s.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office () (Con)
My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Baroness for her Question.
The Children’s Commissioner’s report raises a number of concerns
that we take extremely seriously. Strip-search is one of the most
intrusive powers available to the police. No one should be
subject to the use of any police power based on their race or
ethnicity. The IOPC is currently investigating several instances
of children being strip-searched and it will review whether
existing legislation, guidance and policies remain appropriate.
It is right that we await its findings.
(LD)
My Lords, it is sickening, shocking and truly disturbing to read
the Children’s Commissioner’s report on the thousands of children
who have been strip-searched by the police unsupervised. Most of
us thought that being strip-searched was a rare occurrence during
the Child Q scandal. This has proven not to be so. Worryingly,
those from black and ethnic-minority backgrounds appear to be
disproportionately targeted. Childhood lasts a lifetime. The
mental trauma, mistrust, abuse and humiliation suffered by these
children will stay with them, at a huge cost to society. How are
the Government going to address this unacceptable and despicable
practice? What recourse and disciplinary action will there be
when a safeguarding failure is found to have taken place?
(Con)
My Lords, the noble Baroness is right. Any child subject to
strip-search under PACE should be accompanied by an appropriate
adult unless there is an urgent risk of serious harm or where the
child specifically requests otherwise and the appropriate adult
agrees. Such searches must be carried out by an officer of the
same sex as the child. The Children Act 2004 encourages agencies
to share early concerns about the safety and welfare of children
and young persons and to take preventive action. The Act requires
local policing bodies and chief officers to co-operate with
arrangements to improve the well-being of children in the
authorities’ area. It is too early for me to comment on what sort
of disciplinary processes and so on might be implemented in cases
where there are failures of these things. As I said, we are
awaiting the report from the IOPC and will make the appropriate
response in due course.
(Lab)
My Lords, it seems that every week there are more devastating
revelations for trust in policing in our country, and yet the
Public Order Bill is still moving between the two Houses—it will
come back to us tomorrow. The Bill contains, among other things,
stop and search powers, including without suspicion. At the very
least, those provisions in the Public Order Bill should be paused
by the Government until they can assess what police regulation we
need, as opposed to just endless extra police power.
(Con)
My Lords, as I have said from this Dispatch Box before, stop and
search makes a serious difference to crime prevention. In
2021-22, stop and search removed around 14,900 weapons and
firearms from our streets and resulted in almost 67,000 arrests.
The noble Baroness made good points about trust in the police,
and the Home Secretary has been clear that policing needs to
address all of the causes of poor, and in some cases toxic,
cultures. That will be a key focus of part 2 of the independent
Angiolini inquiry, which will consider issues in policing such as
vetting, recruitment and culture, as well as the safety of women
in public places.
(Con)
My Lords, could my noble friend the Minister clarify the role of
the IOPC here? Is it reviewing just individual cases—so there
will be a number of reports—or is this a systemic review of the
use of this practice? Only if we look at the system can we know
whether there is potentially racial bias within it.
(Con)
My noble friend is right. At the start of the process, 14
referrals involving strip-searches were received by the IOPC from
the Metropolitan Police Service. On 1 August 2022, it confirmed
that it is investigating five of these cases. It decided that six
of them were suitable for local investigation by the force, and
the remaining three are still being assessed to determine whether
further action may be required by the IOPC. However, the IOPC has
been asked to take a more general look at the framework. We
expect its findings soon, and for it to opine a little more
widely.
(CB)
My Lords, nearly 3,000 children have been strip-searched. Waiting
for the IOPC is a long process, and it seems to me that the
Government should intervene to see that the rules are complied
with.
(Con)
The noble and learned Baroness is absolutely correct that there
has been a large number of these cases. Our problem with
intervention is that data has only recently started to be
collected on this. As I said, there is a great deal of incoming
input, and it is appropriate to wait for that to make sure that
we are properly informed.
(Lab)
My Lords, I want to follow on from the noble and learned
Baroness’s question. Would it not be sensible for the Home Office
to require all police forces in England to discontinue any
further participation in Safer School Partnerships and to
withdraw Safer School officers from schools until the very
laudable review is completed?
(Con)
I do not feel particularly qualified to comment on that.
The Lord
My Lords, I declare an interest as vice-chair of the Children’s
Society. I join other noble Lords in expressing horror at the
findings of the Children’s Commissioner’s report. It is vital
that children are treated as children at all times. Can the
Minister reassure the House that children are treated and
recognised as children within every aspect of the criminal
justice system?
(Con)
In areas where the Home Office collects data—for example, on
custody—I can reassure the House that that is the case. For
example, in 99% of cases where searches involved children in
custody, an appropriate adult was present. Obviously, this report
has identified failings in other parts of the system. We are
awaiting the right inputs in order to make a detailed and
thoughtful review, and as soon as that is the case I am sure I
will be able to give the right reverend Prelate more broad
reassurance.
(LD)
My Lords, does the Minister not agree that it is rarely
proportionate for the police to strip-search a child, let alone
2,847 times since 2018? Is the noble Baroness, Lady Casey of
Blackstock, not right when she says that the whole regime of
police stop and search needs a hard reset?
(Con)
The noble Lord invites me to comment on operational police
matters. I do not know whether it is appropriate, but I assume
that they have very good reasons to do this; otherwise, they
would not conduct these searches.
(Lab)
Would the Minister care to reanswer his noble friend who asked
the question about the role of the IOPC? It sounds as though it
is checking a couple of dozen cases, and that is not good enough,
given what the commissioner’s report has identified. Surely we
need a review of all the cases, because there have been dozens a
week over the years. The answer that the Minister gave on the
role of the IOPC is not sufficient.
(Con)
I think I said at the end of my answer to my noble friend that
the IOPC has also been asked to look at the more general
legislative framework around this particular subject and to give
us more comprehensive findings.
(Non-Afl)
My Lords, I am absolutely gutted to hear the Minister respond to
a question by saying that there must have been some reason. I am
a child protection officer and have been a long-standing social
worker, so I am all too aware of the issues around
safeguarding—as the noble Lord should be, as a Home Office
Minister. Can he say that he is either waiting for the review or
that he has already taken the decision that there must have been
a reason? It is either one or the other; it cannot possibly be
both. I will make another point. Given what the noble Baroness,
Lady Benjamin, said, surely everything leads to the conclusion
from the noble Baroness, Lady Casey, that racial discrimination
is endemic in the Met. Can the Minister answer?
(Con)
I have to correct the record, because I did not say that there
“must” be a reason; I said that I assumed that there was a good
reason. To be absolutely clear, that is very different. I agree
with many of the conclusions that the Children’s Commissioner has
come up with—they seem to make a great deal of sense to me—but I
would prefer to wait for the context of the various reviews that
are being undertaken at the moment before giving a further
opinion on this matter.
(Con)
My Lords, will the Minister pay tribute to Dame Rachel de Souza,
who is a superb commissioner and was also an iconic head and
founder of the Inspiration Trust in Norfolk? She is saying that,
while this type of strip-search should not be banned, it should
be looked at very carefully. One of the things she said was that
strip-search should never take place in schools but always in
police stations.
(Con)
I thank my noble friend for that. I am extremely happy to pay
tribute to Dame Rachel de Souza for her report, which strikes me
as very comprehensive—although I confess to having read only part
of it so far. I agree with some of her conclusions, as I have
just said, and I think that the one about schools is an entirely
appropriate conclusion to have reached. In my opinion,
strip-searches should be conducted only in very safe and secure
places.
(Lab)
My Lords, one of the report’s conclusions was that there were
widely differing practices in stop and search and strip-searches
across the country. Does the Minister believe that there are good
examples of stop and search and strip-search, and what can the
Government use from those examples? Is it not right that
particular communities—I am talking about young black men—have
very little trust in the police service, and that it does not
take much for things to kick off and for the police to use
further interventions which are wholly undesirable as a result of
the original police intervention?
(Con)
I certainly agree with the noble Lord’s last point; that is a
significant issue for the police and for us all. It relates to so
many other issues that we deal with on a daily basis regarding
the police, including things that the noble Baroness, Lady Jones,
has brought up in previous debates, such as recruitment and so
on. Regarding strip-search, I argue that, where the rules are
followed, which are pretty clear and rigorous, it could be
appropriate under certain circumstances. However, there needs to
be an appropriate adult present, and there are complications
around that, including making sure that there are enough of them.
The other rules and safeguards that are already in place need to
be followed.
(GP)
My Lords, it is absolutely right and true that the Government
should never interfere with operational policing, but the
Government can recommend that the guidelines are actually
followed. That is the big problem we have here: there were no
appropriate adults in 52% of the cases. In 51% of the cases,
children were strip-searched in police vans, schools and even
fast-food restaurants. I think that the Government have a role
here to say that guidelines are there to be followed.
(Con)
I think that is right. The Government will have a role when the
appropriate time arrives—when the reviews have delivered their
various conclusions—to also suggest and recommend upgrading and
updating that guidance.
(CB)
My Lords, I am sure the Minister will agree that strip-searching
would be humiliating for any of us. It is particularly
humiliating for a child. The Minister has indicated that there
are rules that govern strip-searching, but the rules have not
been followed in many of these cases. Let us not wait for a
review. The rules operate now, today, everywhere. It is the
responsibility of the Home Office to ensure that these rules are
complied with. Will the Minister take this away with a degree of
urgency to make sure that these rules are applied now,
everywhere?
(Con)
I will of course take that back to the department
of Hudnall (Lab)
My Lords, for the benefit of those of us who have not yet been
able to read the report, will the Minister tell the House what
proportion of those nearly 3,000 children who were strip-searched
during that period were charged with any offence?
(Con)
I am afraid I do not have those details. I will have to write to
the noble Baroness.
(Con)
My Lords, I add my voice to those saying that we understand about
the review—there will be lessons to be learned from the reviews
and rules to be updated. But can my noble friend the Minister say
why the Home Secretary could not write to all chief constables
now to ensure that PACE rules are being enforced and adhered to
very closely?
(Con)
I reassure my noble friend that there is no reason why the Home
Secretary could not write now, but the report was delivered in
its final conclusion only on Friday and we are still assessing
its recommendations.
(Lab)
My Lords, less than a third of the cases referred to in the
ombudsman’s report—31%—led to an arrest. Does the Minister agree
with the noble Baroness, Lady Casey, when she said that
strip-searching as done by the Met was an example of
“over-policing and disproportionate use of powers against certain
communities”
and may be due to
“‘adultification’, where Black children are treated as adults and
as a threat, therefore justifying greater use of force or
intrusive interventions.”
Those were her words. Does the Minister agree with them?
(Con)
I am not going to agree or disagree with those words. The noble
Baroness, Lady Casey, delivered them in good faith, and I take
her word in good faith. I think a lot more thought needs to go
into all the various recommendations that have been made in the
various reviews, many of which I happily acknowledge raise a
number of very serious issues that demand urgent attention.
|
