Alex Norris (Nottingham North) (Lab/Co-op) I beg to move, That this
House condemns the Government’s failure to tackle town centre
crime; is concerned that shoplifting has reached record levels,
with a 25% rise over the past year and 1,000 offences per day,
while the detection rate for shoplifters has fallen; believes that
immediate action must be taken to stop the increasing number of
unacceptable incidents of violence and abuse faced by shop workers;
notes that the...Request free trial
(Nottingham North)
(Lab/Co-op)
I beg to move,
That this House condemns the Government’s failure to tackle town
centre crime; is concerned that shoplifting has reached record
levels, with a 25% rise over the past year and 1,000 offences per
day, while the detection rate for shoplifters has fallen;
believes that immediate action must be taken to stop the
increasing number of unacceptable incidents of violence and abuse
faced by shop workers; notes that the number of neighbourhood
police officers and police community support officers has been
reduced by 10,000 since 2015; and calls on the Government to back
Labour’s community policing guarantee, which includes scrapping
the £200 limit on crown court prosecutions for shoplifting in the
Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, creating a
new specific offence of violence against shop workers, rolling
out town centre policing plans and putting 13,000 extra police
and community support officers back in town centres to crack down
on antisocial behaviour.
It is a pleasure to open this debate on a motion in the name of
the Leader of the Opposition, the shadow Home Secretary, myself
and colleagues.
Safety in our town centres is a subject that the public are
deeply concerned about. It has a totemic impact on how we feel
about where we live; people love their community and hate it when
a small number of people are able to wreck it for everyone else.
Nevertheless, it is an undervalued aspect of public policy and we
are currently being let down by the Government’s lack of ideas
and lack of interest in tackling this scourge.
Criminal damage in our town centres increased by 30% last year.
There were 150 incidents of damage in public places each and
every day. Every one of those incidents is another reason for
people to stay at home, shop online or not go to the pub, and
contributes to a sense that it is just not worth the bother of
leaving the house. That is devastating for local
bricks-and-mortar businesses, destroys the viability of our town
centres, runs down patronage of public transport and creates an
inexorable sense of decline.
Those who perpetrate such incidents do it because they think they
can get away with it. In this country we now tolerate 90% of
crimes going unsolved; last year there were 2 million crimes
unsolved. Criminals are now half as likely to be caught as they
were under the previous Labour Government. What an extraordinary
indictment of 13 years of Tory leadership.
(North Shropshire) (LD)
In a rural area such as my constituency, where the town centres
are small and spread out, one of the problems the police have is
getting from place to place, partly because they have a shortage
of basic kit such as police cars. Does the hon. Gentleman agree
that this is not just about community policing, but about
resourcing the police with the physical things that they need to
get about?
Absolutely. I thank the hon. Lady for her question. It becomes
more pressing, as she says, with rural communities, because the
thin blue line can feel very thin indeed. It is important that we
have the right number of officers and the right kit to meet the
needs of the community.
Levels of retail crime, alongside violence and abuse towards
shopworkers, have increased substantially in recent years.
Figures provided by the British Retail Consortium, the retail
trade body, show that retail crime was up by more than a quarter
in England and Wales last year. Again, that is terrible for
business and creates a public environment that people do not want
to be part of—another reason to stay at home.
Similarly, violent and abusive incidents in stores have risen
significantly. In aggregate, we are talking a staggering 850
incidents every single day. That is goods being lifted and staff
being abused physically, threatened, intimidated or spat at—all
those horror stories This is theft and violence on an epidemic
scale, happening across every town centre, every single day.
We have a special duty in this place to stand up for shop
workers—yes, because everybody should be able to go to work
without fearing violence and abuse; yes, because while we told
everyone else to shutter themselves away during the pandemic,
they still went out to work so that we had the food and supplies
we needed; but particularly because we ask them to restrict the
sale of dozens of products that in the wrong hands could be
dangerous, such as acid, knives, alcohol and cigarettes. In that
moment they are of course working for their employer, but beyond
what it might say on their name tag, they are public servants,
and we know that that creates potential flashpoints, each decline
of sale a possible moment for violence or abuse. The continued
lack of action is failing these people.
(Stoke-on-Trent North)
(Con)
May I check something with the shadow Minister? What is the
difference between his proposal and that which was enacted under
the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2023, which upgraded
offences against shop workers, who do very brave work indeed, to
aggravated offences?
I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for seeking to explain
to me my own amendment to that legislation. I promise him that I
will get to that point. I will not break that promise; I will
explain the difference in detail shortly.
Retailers, unions, representative bodies, staff and management
are totally aligned on the need for action—action that I will set
out shortly when I detail our alternative, which is expressed in
the motion. But first we must address this question: how did we
end up here? The blame lies squarely at the door of this
Government, following 13 and a half years of making the lives of
criminals easier. Take first the disastrous decision to cut
20,000 police officers—a decision so damaging that they have
spent the past five years desperately seeking to plug the gap.
The loss of each officer from the frontline emboldened those who
seek to do down our town centres. Those who cause disruption and
crime today learned their skills and gained their confidence in
an environment of hollowed-out policing.
(Bethnal Green and Bow)
(Lab)
Does my hon. Friend agree that there is a link between the 10,000
cut in the number of neighbourhood officers and police community
support officers since 2015 and the increase in shoplifting? Does
he also agree that it is irresponsible of the Government to call
for citizen’s arrests instead of being tough on crime and the
causes of crime?
I am grateful for that intervention. The causality is there: the
lack of availability of neighbourhood policing has created an
environment in which people feel that they can steal without
consequence. On citizen’s arrest, I share my hon. Friend’s view
that it is not something that we should be asking people to do. I
know that the Minister for Crime, Policing and Fire is
enthusiastic about it, but is it practical? Take the Co-op, a
retailer that is making huge strides to protect its staff. In
general, it does not ask its staff to detain shoplifters, but
some of its covert teams do. In incidents where they detain
someone who has committed or is alleged to have committed a
crime, four times in every five, having taken them to the back,
they have to let them go again because there is no one to make
the arrest. The idea that we can citizen’s-arrest our way out of
this is for the birds.
(Caithness, Sutherland and
Easter Ross) (LD)
It is a pity that the Scottish National party Members are not
here, because normally they would waste no opportunity to stand
up and say how well they do things in Scotland, and how much
better they do them than the rest of the UK. We have six police
officers for the whole county of Sutherland, which is 2,028
square miles. I can tell hon. Members that in the biggest
conurbations in my constituency, such as Alness, Wick and Thurso,
we do not see cops on the beat and old people feel very
vulnerable indeed. I know that it is a devolved matter, but I
will not waste this opportunity to point out that things are far
from right in Scotland, and I wish that the Scottish Government
would catch a grip.
Policing is a reserved matter, as the hon. Gentleman says, but
the experience of communities like his is reflected across all
our four nations. That is why I said to his hon. Friend, the hon.
Member for North Shropshire (), that we ought to have that
staffing kit as well as the equipment in order to try to protect
the public.
(Huddersfield)
(Lab/Co-op)
I represent the Labour and Co-operative party and I have great
sympathy for shop workers who are being harassed and attacked,
and having a really tough time. Does my hon. Friend agree that we
need not only more community police, but far better co-operation
with the big supermarkets and their staff, and for them to bring
together a whole team to protect both shoppers and those who are
serving?
I am grateful for that intervention from my Co-operative party
colleague, because I can express our pride that the Co-operative
party is spearheading this work in Parliament. I agree that there
needs to be work between retailers and staff, but we should take
pride in the work that has already gone on between retailers and
the unions. They are in lockstep on this, which is not always the
case, and that co-operation is a great asset in this fight.
Even when the Government have attempted to reverse the disastrous
implications of cutting 20,000 police officers, they have failed,
because in adding back officers, they have squeezed out police
staff and moored warranted officers away from the frontline, so
we are 10,000 neighbourhood police short of the previous figure,
as my hon. Friend the Member for Bethnal Green and Bow () said. Each officer is
another gap in that thin blue line, allowing criminals to run
amok. Half the population say they rarely see police on the beat,
a figure that has doubled since 2010.
However, we know that the Minister for Crime, Policing and Fire
has a cunning plan, which he unveiled last week at Home Office
questions. To beef up the number of neighbourhood police, the
Government are now going to count response police as
neighbourhood police. That is risible nonsense. The clue is in
the name: neighbourhood police are out on the streets, in their
communities, providing a named presence, and building trust and
relationships. The dynamic is different.
Neighbourhood police can be proactive, go to local community
projects, get to know people, and build trust and relationships.
That is a different dynamic from response police, who might
attend a community event, but then a day later be in a situation
down the road where they have to put in someone’s door or
supervise a significant or difficult moment in a community. The
relationship with the community is inherently different.
Similarly, response police can be called away at a moment’s
notice, to the other side of the force area. It is simply not the
same and it is deeply worrying that the Government think that it
is. It represents a triple failure: officers cut, officers added
back in the wrong place and now other types of officers being
rebadged. They are failing communities and failing our
hard-working police.
Dame (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op)
My hon. Friend talks about rebadging officers, but our wonderful
police community support officers are worth a shout-out. They do
day-to-day work and often stay in the job for a long time. When I
am on doorsteps in Hackney, the residents often know the name of
the local PCSO. Obviously, we need more police, but it would be
good to have more PCSOs as well.
My hon. Friend is exactly right and I will come on to our plans
for more PCSOs. They provide a neighbourhood link and, as she
says, a more sustained connection to a community. They also
ensure our police forces are more representative of the
communities they serve, so they add an excellent dimension to our
policing.
However, policing has not been the only problem. We are still
reaping the pain from the catastrophic decision to downgrade
thefts of £200 and under in the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and
Policing Act 2014, which has been a godsend to shoplifters. It
has created a generation of thieves who think they will not be
caught or even investigated. On the back of that, high-volume
organised retail crime has been generated, with huge criminal
enterprises that we are now asking the police to dismantle—what a
dreadful failure of public policy. Even now, when we know the
impact that has had, the Government will not match our call to
scrap that measure. Instead, Ministers cling to the idea that the
police are geared up to follow all reasonable lines of inquiry
and that, once again, they can do more with less. Of course they
cannot do that. Our officers, police staff and communities
deserve better than being set up to fail.
The Government weakened antisocial behaviour powers 10 years ago
and brought in new powers that were so useless they are barely
used, such as the community trigger. Getting rid of powers of
arrest has proved a poor idea, even though they were warned not
to do that. Community penalties have halved and there is a
backlog of millions of hours of community payback schemes not
completed because the Government cannot run the scheme properly.
That is before we get to the failures with early intervention,
with £1 billion taken out of youth service budgets and the
dismantling of drug and alcohol services. The disruption we see
in our town centres today stems from a litany of bad decisions
taken by those on the Government Benches over the last 13 years.
The Government have failed and our communities are paying the
price.
(Rother Valley)
(Con)
The shadow Minister is talking about bad decisions. Does he agree
that the Labour police and crime commissioner made a bad decision
not to reopen Dinnington police station when he had a £2 million
budget underspend a few years ago? He was happy to reopen
Edlington police station in Doncaster, but when it came to Rother
Valley and Dinnington police station, he said no.
As the hon. Gentleman knows, those are devolved decisions where
that individual has the mandate to make such decisions. His
constituents have the right to change the police and crime
commissioner at the next election. They also have the chance to
change the Member of Parliament at the next election, so we shall
wait for those judgments in due course.
I am pleased that he raises the matter of elections, because in
July there was a council election in Dinnington, where the police
station should be reopened, and the Conservatives increased their
share of the vote by over 10%. It is clear that people want the
police station to be reopened and they rejected Labour’s lack of
policing in our area.
The hon. Gentleman wishes to express confidence and ease, but I
am afraid he is not doing a very good job of it.
There is a better way: where the Government have failed, the
Opposition have a plan to wrest back control of our streets.
[Interruption.] Government Members might be interested in some of
the concepts, including the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent North
(), who chirps at me despite
having asked me a question that I am going to address.
We make a community policing guarantee to our country. It starts
with policing back on the beat, with 13,000 more police and
police community support officers in neighbourhood teams. With
funding based on conservative estimates of available savings
identified by the Police Federation, we will restore visible
police and PCSOs back on the streets, deterring and detecting
crime, and building relationships and confidence.
Mr (Old Bexley and Sidcup)
(Con)
The shadow Minister will be aware that here in London, the
Metropolitan police and , the Labour police and crime
commissioner, were given significant funding by the Government to
increase police numbers, but the force was the only one in the
country not to hit its recruitment target, costing London over
1,000 police officers. How would his plan work here in London,
with ?
I will not take lectures on police numbers from a member of a
party that cut them. As I said to his hon. Friend, the hon.
Member for Rother Valley (), those are devolved
matters. As a Government, we will make available the resourcing
for 13,000 more police and police and community support
officers.
Mr Sheerman
My hon. Friend is making a very good speech. We want to protect
shop workers and stop shoplifting—it would be wrong to say that
we did not—but in my constituency, which is similar to that of my
hon. Friend, poverty stalks our land. The gap between rich and
poor means that the country is the most divided I can remember in
my 44 years in Parliament. There are desperate people in our
communities. I do not approve of any of them breaking the law,
but does my hon. Friend agree that it would be dishonest for any
of us to pretend that poverty does not stalk this land?
I do agree. One of the core missions of a future Labour
Government will be to tackle that poverty and give everybody the
opportunity to live full, productive and happy lives.
Secondly, on our policing guarantee, we will tackle antisocial
behaviour in our town centres head on. In particular, we pledge
to introduce new respect orders that will give the police and
local communities the right tools to exclude from town centres
those who repeatedly disrespect them. They will be a quick,
effective tool that tilts the balance back to the vast majority
of people who do things the right way.
Thirdly, we will stand up for shopworkers. We will scrap the
disastrous £200 downgrade in the 2014 Act and thereby make it
clear to thieves that open season is over and to retailers that
we value their businesses. In the same vein, we will heed the
call from USDAW, from all the major retailers and from all the
representative bodies for a new specific offence of assault
against a retail worker. As a Labour and Co-operative party
Member of Parliament, I am proud to have spearheaded attempts to
recognise assault against retail workers as an aggravating factor
in sentencing, but we need greater clarity in the law. Having it
as a sentencing factor alone does not seem to be acting as a
deterrent, so we need a specific offence, as there is in Scotland
thanks to the excellent work of . That will send a clear
signal to those who perpetrate attacks that it is not acceptable,
and make it easier for the police to police this scourge.
Fourthly, we want to put communities back into community
policing. Too often, people tell us that they feel policing is
done to them rather than with them, and that they do not think
that local policing priorities necessarily match their own. Much
of the problem is about resourcing, given the Government’s
denuding of police our forces. Our commitment is for town centre
planning so that those who live, work, play and trade in our town
centres will get to have a say in how they are protected. There
will be proper community police plans to reflect the community’s
priorities, with a named officer to work with as the plans
develop.
Fifthly, the final component of our community policing guarantee
is that we will restore the value and cachet of community
policing. We will ensure that the path to career progression in
policing is through officers getting to know their community, and
that all neighbourhood officers have the skills and training to
be problem solvers as well as recorders of crime. We will also
work with the College of Policing and police chiefs to ensure
that neighbourhood policing has access to cutting-edge technology
and methods, including data analytics and hotspot policing.
That is our community policing guarantee. Taken in its aggregate,
it is by far the boldest commitment to keeping our town centres
safe that has been made in recent memory. That is the scale of
ambition that we ought to see from the Government, but we simply
do not.
This is good moment to talk about the Criminal Justice Bill,
which is to some degree an attempt to address some of the issues
we are debating. We did not oppose it on Second Reading and
intend to work constructively in Committee to improve it. There
are good things in the legislation—we are glad to see an enhanced
focus on fraud; to see the police given powers to address issues
that annoy our constituents, such as the search and seizure of
stolen items that are GPs tracked; and to see greater flexibility
around public spaces protection orders—but is that really it?
This is the final year of this parliamentary term and we have a
crime Bill that is tougher on homeless people than it is on those
who terrorise our town centres. There is nothing on retail crime
and nothing on neighbourhood policing. We will look to add
measures in Committee, but we should not have to.
The Government can take the first step to addressing the
situation by accepting our motion, but I fear that they may well
not be minded to do so. I fear that we will hear the same
messages we always hear: an attempt to convince the British
public that they have never had it so good on policing—record
this or record that—or that in some way our proposals will happen
soon. [Interruption.] The right hon. Minister for Crime, Policing
and Fire has not learned from the Home Secretary the lesson about
chirping from the Front Bench. I say to him that the British
public do not buy those arguments and deserve better. If he
genuinely believes that the status quo is better than what is
offered by those on the Opposition Benches, let us let the
British public decide. Ask them whether they have never had it so
good, or are ready for change. I will take my chances with them
any day.
Several hon. Members rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker ( )
Order. Before I call the Minister, I remind colleagues that if
they want to intervene, they are expected to stay for the entire
speech by the person on whom they intervened. I do not want to
set a time limit on speeches, but my advice is that after the
Minister has finished I suspect there will be about eight minutes
per Member.
1.44pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home
Department ()
I am glad to have this opportunity to speak and hope to set the
record straight. Forgive me if I do not recognise the counsel of
despair emanating from the Opposition Benches. The hon. Member
for Nottingham North () invites us to believe that
there has been a catalogue of failure and that everything is
getting worse, but the facts tell us something different. I do
not pretend that everything is perfect—of course we need to
protect our town centres and the people who use them, and I will
come to all that in a moment—but for all the noise that these
debates can generate, we do the public a disservice if we seek to
distil everything into a row across the Dispatch Box without
sometimes acknowledging the merits of the other side and the
meaningful progress they have sometimes made.
(Bournemouth East) (Con)
On that conciliatory note, could we all just pay tribute to what
the police do, because they are the focus of the debate? They put
on the uniform in the morning and say goodbye to their loved ones
not knowing how their day is going to turn out. As we argue about
where things should go in future, perhaps we can all agree that
they do such an important job for our society and that we owe
them a huge debt of gratitude.
I thank my right hon. Friend for that intervention. I accept
without reservation that there is considerable courage and
selflessness in being a first responder whose job and duty is to
run towards danger when everybody else is running away from
it.
Let me begin with the simplest facts. Since 2010, neighbourhood
crime—the crimes that undermine the fabric of communities and
make people feel unsafe in their homes and on their local
streets—has fallen. The crime survey for England and Wales, which
the Office for National Statistics described as
“the best estimate of long-term trends in crimes against the
household population”,
shows that since 2010 overall crime levels are down by more than
50%. Violent crimes as a whole, which include crimes that involve
any form of offensive weapon, are down by 52%. Theft overall,
which includes domestic burglary and the theft of a vehicle—some
of the most invasive thefts that go directly to a person’s sense
of personal security—has almost halved since we came into office.
Domestic burglary currently stands at its lowest ever level.
(Oldham West and Royton)
(Lab/Co-op)
Does the Minister accept that the workplace is a personal place
for those who work there? The Co-op Group has reported that in
the year to date some 300,000 incidents of abuse and violence
have taken place in shops up and down the country. Employees who
are just there to sell to the public in their community are the
victims of abuse and, in some cases, violence, but the police do
not even turn up to 76% of reports, so how can people feel safe
going to work?
I will come specifically to shop workers. I have no difference of
opinion with the Opposition on the points about the role of shop
workers and some of the issues that affect them personally, and I
reassure the hon. Gentleman that I will come to that.
There are today more police officers in England and Wales than at
any other point in our nation’s history—
(Birmingham, Yardley)
(Lab)
Will the Minister give way?
If I could just finish my sentence, I will of course give way to
the hon. Lady. The most recent figures we have are from March
2023, when the figure for police offices in England and Wales was
149,566. It has never been higher. With that, I give way.
I wonder whether the Minister can provide the per capita of
population figures.
I do not have that figure, so I will have to write to the hon.
Lady.
It is right that decisions about how police resources are
deployed, including the number and composition of people in
neighbourhood and local policing roles, are for the determination
of chief constables, who know their beat better than anyone and
are accountable to democratically elected police and crime
commissioners. Nevertheless, the numbers have a broader
significance, and I want to draw the Opposition’s attention to
four points.
First, due to the investment in the police uplift programme, the
number of police officers in local policing roles is the highest
since comparable data began to be collected, with an increase of
6.5% in the 12 months to 31 March. We have more female officers
and more officers from minority ethnic backgrounds than ever
before—something that I hope the hon. Member for Nottingham North
will agree is consistent with some of the conclusions that were
certainly implied, if not made explicit, on the nature of
representation in Baroness Casey’s report into conduct in the
Metropolitan police.
We have more officers receiving specialist training for specific
categories of crime. I will give the House one example, because
yesterday I visited Avon and Somerset Police, the pioneering
force conducting Operation Soteria Bluestone in the investigation
of rape. They made it perfectly clear to me that the increase in
numbers that they have seen locally has facilitated a huge
increase in the number of specialist trained rape and serious
sexual offences police officers. In fact, there are 2,000
nationwide. I noted that the hon. Gentleman said that we were
setting the police up to fail. That could not be more different
from the information that that force gave me yesterday—and if
they are incorrect, I would appreciate it if he would explain why
when he closes.
(Reading East) (Lab)
I put on record my support for the police, particularly Thames
Valley Police—like the Minister, I represent a constituency in
Berkshire. Can she update the House on the proportion of new
officers who are still in training? It seems to be a very serious
issue in Reading and the surrounding areas that, while officers
have been recruited, they are still in training, as opposed to
the fully trained and experienced officers who were lost through
austerity.
The hon. Gentleman asks a fair question, and I will have to get
back to him on that. I know that the number in my part of the
Thames Valley is quite low, but that may not extend to Reading.
He deserves an answer on that, and I will get one to him.
The Government have also ensured that the police have the
resources they need. This year they received record funding of
above £17.2 billion. That is an extra £550 million for frontline
policing compared with last year. I gently remind those on the
Opposition Benches that they voted against our police funding
settlements every single year between 2016 and 2019.
I want to draw our attention down to community level and make a
few observations. We have had a commitment from the National
Police Chiefs’ Council—it was announced in August, as the hon.
Member for Nottingham North will recall—that the police will
follow up on all reasonable lines of inquiry and that there is no
offence too small. That commitment is intended to offer huge
reassurance to the public. It was also this Government who
introduced the safer streets fund, which has been in receipt of
£120 million already, for 270 projects covering all 43 police
forces in England and Wales, and which is complemented by the
StreetSafe app.
All that kind of thing can seem quite microscopic, as though it
only affects individual streets or individual parks, reporting a
broken light or a dark and dangerous corner of a popular area for
jogging. The point is that people can report the area and action
will be taken, and all that contributes to improving the fabric
of communities up and down the United Kingdom.
I want to spend a moment on retail crime, which I will deal with
in two parts: first I will cover shoplifting itself, and then I
will move on to assault on retail workers. I take issue, very
respectfully, with the suggestion that somehow the Government are
being complacent in shoplifting. The Government are clear that we
expect the police to take a zero-tolerance approach to
shoplifting and violence towards shop workers. I want to disabuse
anyone of the notion that somehow we have decriminalised
shoplifting offences below £200.
I gently draw the shadow Minister’s attention to the following.
In 2020, the National Business Crime Centre surveyed police
forces in England and Wales, asking whether they had a policy of
not responding to shoplifting if the goods were worth less than
£200. Not one force in England and Wales said that it had such a
policy. He will know as well as I do that the National Police
Chiefs’ Council recently produced a retail crime action plan,
which included a commitment to prioritise police attendance at
the scene where violence had been used against shop staff.
I accept the explanation that it is not a written policy, but how
does the Minister explain that in 76% of the 300,000 sample
cases, the police did not turn up?
It is difficult for me to identify every single complaint and
whether somebody has attended, but one thing I think is relevant
is that the increase in shoplifting that we have regrettably seen
over the past 12 months has been met by a corresponding and
equivalent increase in the volume of charges for shoplifting
offences. Charges are up by 29% in the past 12 months. I gently
draw the hon. Gentleman’s attention to that.
I want to talk specifically about offences against retail
workers. I invite the hon. Member for Nottingham North to answer
this point when he closes—it is not put in an aggressive way,
because I recognise the role that retail workers perform and it
is completely unacceptable that they should be subject to
violence in the line of their duties, but it is already unlawful
to commit an act of assault. It is criminalised under the
Criminal Justice Act 1988 and the Offences against the Person Act
1861.
The hon. Gentleman knows, because we have already had this
discussion, that there is a statutory obligation to treat the
fact that an individual is a retail worker as an aggravating
factor. He has identified the fact that the trade unions support
a new law, but I say very respectfully that the judges do not,
the Crown Prosecution Service does not and the police forces I
have spoken to do not. The practitioners in this area of the law
do not support a new law. Even though he has made that point, he
has not identified any case where he considers there to have been
a miscarriage of justice because the laws were not sufficient to
offer protection. It is not enough simply to assert that we need
new laws without setting out clearly why the existing statutory
protection does not succeed.
Let me now turn to the issue of antisocial behaviour—it is not
minor or trivial, and I make no bones about that. It is probably
the principal crime that all MPs hear about, irrespective of the
constituencies we represent. I want to reassure the hon.
Gentleman that we have taken a range of legislative and
non-legislative action. A new antisocial behaviour action plan
was introduced earlier this year, backed by £160 million of
funding to ensure that our commitments have real teeth. He will
be aware of the hotspot patrolling pilot that has been conducted
across 10 police forces and is about to be rolled out on a
national basis because of its success.
(Rother Valley)
(Con)
I thank the Minister for the £2.4 million given to South
Yorkshire Police for antisocial behaviour hotspots, including in
Maltby and Dinnington, areas in my constituency that are plagued
by antisocial behaviour. When I met the police and the police and
crime commissioner, they said that that money is making a real
difference to getting boots on the ground and on patrols. I thank
the Minister for the extra funds to clamp down on antisocial
behaviour in Rother Valley.
It is very heartening to hear that those funds are making a real
difference in my hon. Friend’s constituency.
I also draw the shadow Minister’s attention to some of the new
teeth, if I may call them that, in the Criminal Justice Bill. He
will be aware that we have lowered the minimum age at which a
community protection notice can be ordered to 10 years old. That
is not just to achieve consistency with other aspects of criminal
justice, but because we recognise that in reality quite a lot of
antisocial behaviour is committed by those in the age 10 to 16
bracket. That is a common complaint that many in this House will
be familiar with.
We have extended police powers to implement a public spaces
protection order. I mention that simply because I could not
differentiate between that and the respect order that the hon.
Gentleman was describing, but it gives the police greater powers
for a rapid response. We have also expanded the minimum exclusion
period by 50%, from 48 hours to 72 hours, to give authorities
more powers to implement dispersal arrangements.
Moving on to our Criminal Justice Bill, I think I noted the
shadow Minister’s qualified agreement with at least some of its
contents, and certainly those on the Opposition Benches did not
vote against it on Second Reading. We respectfully say that the
Bill takes the fight to the criminals, introducing new powers to
enter premises and seize stolen goods—the example given
repeatedly during the debate was of stolen mobile phones, the
everyday theft that people endure. It contains new powers on
knife crime to seize, retain and destroy a bladed article found
on private property, without evidence that it has been used in
conjunction with a criminal offence, but where there is a
reasonable belief that it may be, and new laws on possession of a
knife with intent.
I would add one or two other measures that are just as important
to community safety. This Bill, for the first time, recognises
coercive control as the cancer of a crime that it is, by putting
those convicted of a serious offence in that regard under the
multi-agency public protection arrangements and then putting them
on the violent and sex offender register.
The hon. Member for Nottingham North was critical of the Criminal
Justice Bill, but he neglected to say anything about the
Sentencing Bill, which has its Second Reading tomorrow. That Bill
will put some of the worst offenders away for longer, so some of
the men who maraud on our streets to carry out the most grotesque
offences against women—we all know their names—can anticipate a
whole-life order without the possibility of parole, even if
theirs was a one-off offence. Rapists, who under the last Labour
Government served just 50% of their sentence behind bars under
section 44 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, can now look forward
to spending the entirety of their sentence in custody without the
possibility of parole.
Mr Sheerman
I am not sure that I like the language of “taking the fight to
the criminals.” The fact of the matter is that we want to deal
with criminals in the right way. If only the Minister would look
at the injustices of joint enterprise, under which almost 1,000
young people are in prison with long sentences for crimes in
which they did not actually physically take the fight to
anyone.
The hon. Gentleman has been a compassionate campaigner on the
issue of joint enterprise, and I have listened to him a lot over
the years. I know that the matter was considered by the Court of
Appeal, and its decision was not consistent with some of his
remarks, but that conversation should be continued because it is
a developing area of the law.
I will conclude with a quotation from a non-political figure. His
Majesty’s chief inspector of constabulary, Andy Cooke, said
recently:
“England and Wales are arguably safer than they have ever
been.”
I make no apology for ending where I began: neighbourhood crime
has fallen by 50% since 2010, and I am proud of that. Of course,
we can go further, and we are building and developing police
powers, new laws and community measures so that we can get there,
protecting the law-abiding majority and cherishing the town
centres in our communities by keeping them safe.
2.01pm
(Halifax) (Lab)
1 hope that anyone who has visited Halifax recently would agree
that, despite the years of austerity and the challenges typically
facing northern Pennine towns, we are doing pretty well—thanks
largely and in no small part to good decisions taken by our
ambitious Labour council.
It is a particularly busy time of year. With the Christmas
markets, the festive event season at the magnificent Piece Hall,
and the cultural and independent retail offer at Dean Clough
mill, we have a lot to be very proud of stretching right across
the town. However, as in almost all town centres and the
communities beyond, staying on top of antisocial behaviour and
criminality is an ongoing challenge. We are the home of “Happy
Valley”, but despite all our pride for the stunning backdrop that
wraps around that gripping drama, we need to grapple with some of
the darker realities that have inspired the show.
Research undertaken by Tom Scargill at the Halifax Courier shone
a spotlight on exactly that. The Courier found that between
August 2020 and September of this year, 355 people have been
arrested for knife-related crimes in Calderdale, including two
arrests for murder in August 2021, and five arrests for attempted
murder. Offenders ranged from children as young as 12 to adult
males in their 70s. Alongside harrowing incidents of sexual
crime, there were 71 arrests for threats to kill, and 107 arrests
for assault with injury involving knives. Those statistics are
shocking, but behind every number is the harrowing experience of
a victim.
Those statistics were published prior to the devastating events
in the early hours of 2 October, when a triple stabbing in
Halifax town centre claimed the lives of two young men aged just
19 and 21. The senseless tragedy sent shockwaves across the town,
and our thoughts and condolences continue to be with the families
and friends of those two young men who never came home from their
night out. The tragedy occurred after a night out in Halifax’s
thriving night-time economy. Knives should not be on our streets
at any time of day, and the Government must strain every sinew to
reverse that shameful trend.
I pay tribute to Pubwatch chair Martin Norris and vice-chair
Simon Woodcock, who work incredibly hard to bring partners
together to ensure that Halifax is a safe night out for everyone.
However, they need help and support from the police, Calderdale
Council and wider partners to embed best practice, responsible
management and behaviours into the night-time economy, to the
benefit of revellers and the wider community. I commend them for
their efforts.
When I spend time knocking on doors and speaking to town centre
businesses, people’s fear and experiences of crime feel more real
than ever. Reports of drug dealing, antisocial behaviour and
speeding in busy pedestrian areas come up on almost every street.
I pay tribute to our local police officers, particularly our
neighbourhood policing team, which is so ably led by Inspector
Jim Graham. They are on the frontline of efforts to ensure that
our town centres and wider neighbourhoods are safe and welcoming
places. However, there are still 10,000 fewer neighbourhood
police than in 2015, and teams are almost always carrying
significant numbers of vacancies.
We will not improve safety in towns or across communities without
looking after police officers themselves. The Police Federation
of England and Wales has just launched its annual pay and morale
survey for 2023. Last year’s survey revealed that 95% of the
nearly 37,000 officers who responded said that their treatment by
the Government had harmed their morale, while 87% said the same
about their pay, so although there has been a great deal of
consensus in the Chamber about paying tribute to police officers
for the great work that they do in our communities, it is
incredibly important that we establish a consensus on that point
as well. The survey found that nine in 10 police officers feel
that they are worse off financially than five years ago, and that
nearly one in five officers plans on handing in their resignation
as soon as possible, or within the next two years, because of
reasons that include unfair pay.
Independent research carried out by the Social Market Foundation
last year revealed that police officers’ pay had declined by 17%
in real terms, making the police an outlier among protective
services workers, public sector workers and all workers, who,
over the same period, have had real-terms pay rises of 1%, 14%
and 5% respectively. What it is about police officers, who have
no industrial rights, that has made them such an easy target for
attacks on their pay in recent years?
Hon. Members might remember that I started the Protect the
Protectors campaign back in 2016 after I had been forced to call
999 from a police car to call for back up for the single-crewed
police officer I was shadowing when a routine vehicle stop
suddenly turned very nasty. The Assaults on Emergency Workers
(Offences) Act 2018 was passed thanks to an outstanding campaign
by my hon. Friend the Member for Rhondda (Sir ). Although that legislation
has not delivered the societal change of eradicating assaults on
emergency service workers, as we had hoped, it did send out a
strong message that that was not acceptable and would not be
tolerated.
That legislation recognised the somewhat unique responsibilities
of emergency service workers, who we ask to run towards danger on
our behalf, but it is incredibly depressing that we now have to
consider as a matter of urgency what further protections should
be made available to retail workers. The results of the Union of
Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers “Freedom from Fear” survey
of 2022 are shocking. They revealed that three quarters of retail
workers have experienced verbal abuse, half had been threatened
by a customer, and 8% had been assaulted. The survey revealed
that nearly a third were considering changing their job, and more
than four in 10 felt anxious about work, all because of high
levels of abuse, threats and violence.
That comes as shoplifting has reached record levels—up 20% in
West Yorkshire and 25% across England and Wales over the past
year—with the number of offences reaching 1,000 per day, which
paints a particularly depressing picture of what retail workers,
store managers and business owners have to deal with. Despite
that, the detection rate of shoplifters has actually fallen, as
set out in Labour’s motion. I heard what the Minister said, but
surely the Government’s decision in 2014 to bring in legislation
to downgrade enforcement when the value of stolen goods is below
£200 has had a detrimental impact on detection rates and
completely diminished justice for shopkeepers who face brazen
thefts from their stores. I hope that the Minister will be
explicit about how that failure will be addressed.
The police and their partners work hard to keep our town centres
safe, but it feels increasingly as if they are fighting a losing
battle. Far from being tough on crime and the causes of crime, it
feels like the past 13 years have been tough on policing, tough
on the criminal justice system, and devastating for youth
services. We need to rebuild those services if we are to start to
reverse the ugly trends in our town centres and our communities.
We need a Labour Government.
2.09pm
(Gedling) (Con)
I know that in an Opposition day debate, it is customary for the
Opposition to have a pop at the Government and for the Government
to have a pop at the Opposition. However, on a serious note, even
if I do not agree with some of the points that the Opposition are
making and the conclusions they are drawing, the theme they have
raised this afternoon is important. It is important that we
debate it and discuss the work that has gone on. I will focus on
three points: the high street generally, shops in particular, and
the legislative framework that we are working under.
This subject is important, because economically, our high streets
have had a difficult time recently, and it is important that we
do what we can to get them to thrive. Covid has had an effect on
many shops nationally, and the growth in online shopping has
perhaps made our high streets not as attractive as they were in
the past. We need to make sure that our high streets are an
attractive place to shop. We have been celebrating Small Business
Saturday recently; in that context, where crime and antisocial
behaviour is a problem, it acts as a deterrent to shopping on the
high street. We need to take that seriously and deal with it. In
2019, I stood on a manifesto that promised to recruit 20,000
extra police officers, and I am very pleased that that target has
been smashed, with 418 extra officers in Nottinghamshire. Among
other things, that has enabled us to have higher-profile local
policing on the back of the cuts in neighbourhood crime, which,
as has been set out, is down 51% since 2010.
To contextualise this matter, and on a personal note, I would
like to thank Mark Stanley, my local neighbourhood policing
inspector in Gedling, for his work. Faced with a particular
problem with antisocial behaviour in Arnold in my constituency,
the police did a lot of proactive work locally to put on more
patrols and create a visible presence in the town centre. That is
starting to have an effect; the extra resources that are now
available have helped us to have proactive, intelligence-led
policing. There is much more work to be done in Arnold and
elsewhere, but we have made a good start.
Turning to shops in particular, retail is in focus as we approach
Christmas, and the issues affecting retail workers have been much
in the news, but they are a year-round issue. I agree with the
hon. Member for Nottingham North () that the work of the
Co-op—the shop, not the Co-operative party—has been helpful in
raising the profile of incidents that have been affecting its
staff. I have found the information it has supplied me with about
Co-ops in my constituency very helpful; I am thinking in
particular of the one on Coppice Road in Arnold, which I shopped
at very regularly when I lived nearby. The Co-op has given very
graphic explanations of some of the issues its staff have been
facing, and I have had an opportunity to speak to staff there as
well.
In that context, I welcome the launch of the Government’s retail
crime action plan and the commitment to urgently attend scenes of
shoplifting involving violence, where security guards have
detained an offender, or where assistance is needed to secure
evidence. I also welcome the introduction of the new specialist
police team Pegasus to create a comprehensive intelligence
picture of the organised crime gangs that are behind many
shoplifting incidents, and locally, I welcome the fact that part
of the £750,000 safer streets fund has been awarded to
Netherfield and Colwick in my constituency. That will enable us
to bring forward a whole raft of measures to cut crime, including
CCTV, safer streets wardens, better street lighting, a burglary
reduction officer and a Shopwatch radio scheme. Victoria retail
park in Netherfield has been particularly affected by crime, and
I hope that when these measures are introduced, they will target
the specific issues that that area faces. I welcome the
investment in that community.
In this debate, we have considered aspects of the legislative
framework that underpins this issue. As legislators, we have two
things that we can do: we can scrutinise those who have power,
and we can make and repeal laws. If we feel strongly about a
subject, there is a strong temptation to create new laws to try
to deal with it. That is a very natural human reaction—as
legislators, there are only so many levers that we can pull—but I
would be reluctant to follow all of the recommendations in the
motion. There is well-established legislation, from the Offences
against the Person Act 1861 through to the Theft Act 1968 and
beyond, that deals with these issues. If person A attacks or
threatens person B, that is a bad thing in itself; we do not need
to create extra offences to deal with it. What we have is
sufficient, and there is danger in creating new offences.
To summarise, I am pleased with the great investment in dealing
with crime, the extra police officers on our streets in Gedling
and the extra measures that are being introduced, but there is
obviously much more to be done. I look forward to the legislation
that will come before the House shortly.
2.15pm
(Oldham West and Royton)
(Lab/Co-op)
The reason why we are all in the Chamber for this debate is that
we understand the importance and significance of our town centres
and high streets. They are our community, they are our economy,
and in large part they are the heritage of our place—that is why
we hold them so dear. Every town centre is different, unique in
its character; even within constituencies, we recognise that. I
see it myself in Oldham, Chadderton and Royton: each has its own
identity, its own place in history, and its own role in the
community.
Over the past decade or more, though, we have not just seen the
usual changes that take place over a lifetime. Town centres have
always had to change: they had to change when the rise of the
shopping centre changed the traditional long high street, when
the retail parks opened and when online retail took off. They
have always adapted and changed, but now it feels like a
combination of factors are undermining the potential of our town
centres to thrive and have a place in the future, and some of
them come at the direct behest of the Government. If we accept
that our town centres are important for our community, our
economy and our heritage, those are the things that will be
affected if we do not take action.
Let us list some of the changes that will be familiar to every
single community—almost nowhere in the country is protected from
these changes. Banks, including banks that were bailed out by the
taxpayer and are owned by the state, are closing high street
branches. In the past 10 years, nearly 8,000 branches have
closed, which of course affects local jobs, but also reduces the
footfall in town centres and high streets. In some cases, if
people cannot go to the bank, they do not have a reason to go
into town at lunchtime. There are some exceptions—Nationwide, a
mutual, has made a commitment to ensure that its branch network
is maintained—but we do not see the same commitment from many
high street operators. That is undermining our town centres.
Sir (South Staffordshire)
(Con)
The hon. Gentleman is making a very important and valuable point.
The development of banking hubs in some towns, such as in Stone
following the loss of Lloyds bank, will have a big impact. Does
he agree that banking hubs should be rolled out across many more
towns in his constituency and mine?
I do agree with that—in fact, it is Labour party policy to create
those banking hubs—but we should not have got into this position
to begin with. It should have been required by law that the last
bank in town has a community responsibility. There is not a
single bank in Royton or Chadderton district centre; we would
have to build a hub from scratch, because when the Lloyds and
Halifax closed in the respective towns, the Government took no
action to say, “Hang on. We have already lost five, six or seven
banks. We need to make sure at least one remains, so that there
is consumer choice.” There will be a lot of making-up to do when
the election comes; it will be done, but I am afraid we will be
starting from a very low point. However, I accept the right hon.
Gentleman’s generous point about the importance of those
banks.
We have had 9,000 shops close in the last decade, affecting
125,000 jobs in their communities: 41% of those were clothing
shops, 19% sold household goods and 10% were convenience stores.
Thinking about convenience stores, whether it be the local Co-op,
Tesco Express or Morrisons, where will the cash machine be after
the bank closes? The bank closes, the post office closes and the
convenience store closes, and there is no cash machine for people
to take out money from the bank, leading to financial isolation
in many places.
Pubs are the beating heart or the anchor of many communities, and
the place where people can get together to tackle loneliness and
isolation. Particularly in industrial towns such as mine, the
buildings of significance on the high street—where the heritage
is really brought out and we get the character of the place—are
the church, the pub and the town hall. In many places, those big
assets are under threat. Some 13,600 pubs have closed in the last
10 years—the numbers are down 22%.
If we look at the public sector, in my town of Oldham—a town of a
quarter of a million people—thousands of jobs are being taken
away from the town centre. Those are people who do not go out to
lunch to buy a sandwich and do not support local retail. More
than that, it removes a sense of identity and of belonging in a
place, and it has an impact on how safe people feel there. The
Government have not just closed our county court and our
magistrates court, but caused the closure of so many police
stations that there is not a single custody cell in our town.
Even if somebody was arrested for violence against a shop worker,
they would be taken out of town to be processed. The chief
superintendent in my town says that that has a material impact on
the decisions officers take about arrests being made and people
being taken to custody, because they cannot afford to take a
whole day out from the frontline on the beat for that. It is
having a material impact.
My hon. Friend talks about the time that takes up for police
officers. I was sat recently with my ill father for 24 hours in
A&E—not just a TV programme—and I noticed that there were
three shift changes of police officers to sit with somebody who
was also waiting for 24 hours in A&E, so the crushing of
public services elsewhere is detrimental for our police
forces.
We do see that, as I will come on to say a bit later. In Oldham
town centre, we have a lot of conversions from offices, pubs and
retail to houses in multiple occupation. A lot of complaints are
caused by that concentration of high-demand social problems, but
there is not the back support that used to be there for drug and
alcohol abuse, domestic violence and on-street offences. In the
end, the police are the only number people call because they are
the only ones who might turn out. The point about attendance at
A&E is absolutely right. In many places, the police are not
just upholding the law, but trying to keep society together
because all else has given way.
We see these problems much more broadly, even beyond the public
sector and in local government. Our HMRC office has closed and
the Department for Work and Pensions office has closed, taking
hundreds or thousands of staff away from the town centre. We are
also seeing cuts to arts and culture: local theatres have closed
and local community organisations have withdrawn services away
from towns.
More than that, in the face of such decline, local authorities
have been disempowered in dealing with what follows. We have seen
offices that used to provide footfall and jobs for the local
community being converted, with no consideration of the capacity
and infrastructure of the local community, to substandard
accommodation—we call them guinea pig hutches because they are so
small, and they do not provide the right living standards—or to
HMOs in which people have shared accommodation. The Government’s
housing benefit changes in relation to financial provision for
under-21s are adding to that social problem. The market has been
completely changed, so when we walk down a high street, what used
to be a pub, a bank or a shop is completely blank. We can walk
from door to door without seeing a single shopfront because they
have been converted to that type of residential use, with all the
issues that brings.
Another issue is ownership. The Government could bring in a
register of beneficial ownership so that we know who owns our
high streets. The trouble many local authorities have is that a
building can be empty and boarded up for decades or generations,
attracting antisocial behaviour, but they are not able to take
any action because they cannot find out who the owner is. If the
owner is registered at that address, but they are not there, how
on earth does the local authority find out who owns it? Many
owners are offshore or around the world. The Government could
make that change, but they choose not to do so.
On taxation, how odd is it that with business rates, someone is
taxed before they can take a penny through the till? They are
taxed to open the shop door. They can take not a single penny
through the till during a trading day, and they will pay to
exist. There is no other form of taxation that charges people to
exist; it is usually charged on the income they receive or the
profits they make. That is not the case with business rates, and
that is having a material impact on the survival of shops.
On transport and accessibility, how many bus routes have been cut
so people cannot get into town? Especially in rural and coastal
communities where the service is not as frequent, when it gets
cut, how on earth do people get anywhere near their town
centre?
On crime and antisocial behaviour, many MPs in the Chamber will
have attended their local high street and town centre for Small
Business Saturday, when we of course celebrate independent
retailers, and they will have heard the same story that I have
heard from Maggie Hughes, who owns a clothing shop called Zutti
in Oldham. It is a staple of our community: it has been there for
40 years, and everybody knows and loves Maggie and the staff who
work there. She is also the vice-chair of the town centre board.
She said that she is fearful for the street and the way it is
declining, because of antisocial behaviour and crime. For the
first time ever, I had to wait to be buzzed in before I went
through the door because, for her own safety and that of the shop
workers, she has had to put a security lock on the door. That is
not right.
It is not right that people go to work fearful for themselves and
for their staff, let alone for their stock. Most retailers accept
that, to a degree, they are going to get some marginal loss of
stock, as they call it. However, they do not at all accept that
the staff who are there to work—by the way, many of the employees
in retail jobs in town centres are female—are vulnerable not just
to theft, but to people turning violent if they are challenged.
Even more than that, if when they are challenged they are
detained, staff can call the police, but the police do not even
turn up in the majority of cases.
We can see how all this is adding to the perfect storm, which is
why the Co-operative party, USDAW, the Labour party and
Co-operative Retail Services are demanding a change in the law to
protect shop workers. It is not enough for this to be an
aggravating factor; it has to be a stand-alone offence. This
Parliament makes laws that we expect shop workers to uphold—on
cigarette sales, on alcohol, on knives, on fireworks—and they
deserve the protection of this Parliament in protecting our
communities, so no more words; let us see action on that
front.
2.26pm
Sir (Northampton North) (Con)
I commend this debate. When it comes to safety in town centres,
my constituency of Northampton North has seen knife crime, and it
has had a very painful impact. We all want safety in our town
centres, and at the moment that is particularly true of the
Jewish community, who have been subject to numerous antisemitic
incidents in the last few weeks.
I would like to tell the House about a shocking example. I can
relate this to an incident way back in 1963—60 years ago—in
Bristol, when a boycott of the buses was organised by the people
of Bristol because black people were barred, believe it or not,
from working as crew on the Bristol Omnibus Company’s buses.
Nowadays, the Bristol bus boycott of 1963 is rightly celebrated—I
can see that Opposition Members know about it. It is celebrated
as a reason for the racial discrimination laws that were passed
later in the 1960s.
I mention that case because something similar is happening today,
and over the last few days. That was 60 years ago, but in 2023
there is another heinous prejudice on the buses—this time on the
London buses. The Independent newspaper today is among many
reporting that Jewish children in north London are experiencing
buses deliberately failing to stop to pick them up at bus stops.
Several incidents are being investigated by the police, and the
Metropolitan police have tweeted about this or spoken about it
today.
In one incident, several Jewish schoolboys were waiting at
Egerton Road bus stop in Stamford Hill and signalled for a bus to
stop. The driver slowed down, but then continued without
stopping. It is claimed that several passengers were encouraging
the driver’s actions, making antisemitic remarks and thanking the
driver for not stopping. Three days later, a similar incident
occurred. A 13-year-old Jewish girl was on the bus, and she
reported that the driver slowed down, but did not stop for Jewish
schoolboys who were waiting to be picked up. This was early in
the morning on their way to school. At the next stop, the driver
did stop, proving therefore that it had been done for prejudiced
reasons. That is a live example, 60 years on from the horrific
boycott in Bristol—the boycott was a good thing, of course, but
the reason for it was prejudice.
The Community Security Trust is a charity that I know is strongly
supported by both the Conservative and Labour parties. I have
been to its events, I am proud to say, and I have seen Labour
leaders there for years, as well as Conservative leaders. It is
an excellent charity and is strongly supported by all. It has
reported the following incidents in the past few days: a young
girl shouted out of a passing car, “dirty effing Jews” at a
Jewish person walking past; a Jewish boy was at a bus stop and a
group of youths shouted,
“let’s see you run Jew boy”,
and then chased him; at a London train station, a man approached
a Jewish girl and said,
“I hope you and all your people die in the war.”
A Jewish organisation that works in holocaust education received
a message via its website saying:
“Nazi Israel, which has nuclear weapons, must all surrender and
be arrested to stand trial. White-hat hackers blast these
Nazis.”
In Manchester, two men were walking towards a woman wearing a
star of David, shouting, “Gas, gas.” In Essex a woman was woken
up by banging on her front door, and a group of men shouting “get
out bloody Jews.” In London, a woman said to a visibly Jewish
man:
“Oh you are everywhere, just like the rest.”
On a bus in Brighton, a man repeatedly called a woman an “evil
Jew”. A woman at a pro-Palestinian protest in Glasgow was holding
a sign saying,
“one holocaust does not justify another.”
A rabbi in the west midlands received a phone call saying—I will
not use offensive words—“I wiped myself on your Torah.” A woman
shouted:
“You effing Jews think you own the world”
at a passer-by in London. A Jewish boy was getting changed at
school when two other students shouted, “you’re bombing Gaza.”
Those are just a few examples from the past few weeks.
In the 54 days between the Hamas attacks and last Wednesday, CST
recorded at least 1,747 antisemitic incidents across the United
Kingdom, which is the highest ever total reported to CST across a
54-day period since it was established 40 years ago in 1984.
Right now, in the last few minutes, in the Regent’s Park area of
London an incident has been occurring. I have been told of large
numbers of police attending Regent’s Park because of an incident
to do with a banner that has been placed on a building which
says, “globalise the intifada.”
When it comes to safety in town centres, it is crucial that
safety applies to all. I would want to stand and defend any
ethnic group or any person of any faith if they were subject to
those sorts of attacks. I know people on the left and on the
right who have spent their careers doing that. They are proud of
doing so, and have done so for generations. We now see members of
a very small community—a Jewish community which amounts to less
than 0.5% of the total population of this country; only about
250,000 people in a population of 70 million—who are subject to
the sort of abuse that frankly would not have been seen since the
days of the Ku Klux Klan in America, and probably would have been
the subject of disgust 70 or 80 years ago in this country. It
certainly would have been at the time of the battle of Cable
Street.
When it comes to safety for all, now is an opportunity for those
who are not of the Jewish faith to support those who are. I
commend Labour for holding this debate. I know that this issue
goes across party political divides; this is not a party
political point at all. That gives me comfort, because I know
that all those of good faith in this country of any religion, and
of none, and people of all ages, ethnicities, colours and social
backgrounds, would know that the sort of examples I have been
giving to the House today are abhorrent and a disgrace to this
country. I must demand that the police, the Mayor of London, and
everyone else in authority, including those responsible for
Transport for London, immediately take action to deal with the
examples I have given. This is becoming an emergency situation
and the offenders must be caught. People who are driving buses
and behaving in such a fashion should not only be dismissed for
gross misconduct, but should attract serious criminal
charges.
2.35pm
(Newcastle upon Tyne
North) (Lab)
I am sorry, in many respects, to follow the right hon. and
learned Member for Northampton North (Sir ) and to hear the horrifying
examples of antisemitism and racism that have surfaced on our
streets. I absolutely agree that this is not a party political
matter; it is one on which we in this House stand united, and we
agree with the action he calls for. There is very much solidarity
with all those in our country who face such abhorrent and
unacceptable abuse.
What is a party political matter, however, is the current
Government’s record on crime and policing, which is something we
want to address as part of this debate. We know the challenges
faced in our communities and on our streets, and businesses and
individuals who work in those businesses are paying the price for
a decline in the effectiveness of our policing, and collapsing
confidence in it. That is the message that Government will
hopefully get during this debate.
This weekend was Small Business Saturday—other colleagues have
mentioned that—and like many, I spent Saturday morning visiting
and speaking to businesses in my local area on Gosforth High
Street. Those businesses are the beating heart of our
communities. We treasure them more than ever, particularly after
covid and the inability to go to the shops and the challenges
around that. It is heart-warming to visit local independent
businesses and, happily for those where I was on Saturday, to see
them thriving, despite rising cost pressures, rising bills, and
ever increasing competition from online sources. There was a
lovely, thriving atmosphere in Gosforth at the weekend.
However, that does not change the reality for so many businesses
which are facing a shocking increase in shoplifting. Across
Northumbria last year there was a staggering 44% increase in
shoplifting. That is horrendous, and with the £200 limit on Crown
court prosecutions for shoplifting and antisocial behaviour, it
is a real hammer blow for businesses that seem to be being told
that they have to accept such behaviour as part of running their
business. Many are paying for additional security just to run
their businesses, and that is damaging not only to the businesses
themselves, but to shop workers and those in the community who do
not always have the confidence to go shopping in their local
area. Retail crime is a real blight, and it is having profound
financial and societal costs. That is why I support USDAW’s
Freedom from Fear campaign. It is important to raise awareness of
this issue and ensure that, in the hustle and bustle of Christmas
shopping, we always treat shop workers with the respect that they
deserve.
Some of the figures are horrifying. Seven out of 10 retail
workers have been abused in the past 12 months, 49% have been
threatened with physical violence, and 8% have been physically
assaulted. The situation is real and a concern. Indeed, 88 major
retail bosses felt compelled to contact the Government to demand
action, because the reality of rising concern in our shops is
happening on this Government’s watch. I hope the Minister is
taking note of those concerns today.
I know that Northumbria’s police and crime commissioner is very focused on
supporting Northumbria’s limited resources to identify repeat
offenders and tackle this issue, but alongside that we have
disproportionate cuts in funding to Northumbria’s police budgets,
and current legislation is holding back action that could and
should be taken against people who are shoplifting and causing
disturbances in shops.
The Government’s approach to police funding has left the country
with 10,000 fewer neighbourhood police and PCSOs since 2010. The
Government congratulate themselves on putting an uplift back in
place, but Northumbria police remains 427 officers short compared
with pre-2010 levels. Those officers could be combating these
issues and making communities feel safe and be safer, which is
what we need to see. The hollowing out of neighbourhood policing
has allowed antisocial behaviour to blight certain parts and
communities, preventing people from shopping locally and driving
people back into their homes or back to shopping online, when we
know that we need to support these shops and make sure that
people feel confident to go out shopping.
Newcastle has a world-renowned vibrant nightlife, which we want
to see not just in the city centre, but in places such as
Gosforth High Street and Osborne Road. People love to go out and
eat in the bars and restaurants and socialise. We know that times
are tough and people in my region are increasingly challenged
financially, but the last thing we need is for people to feel a
safety challenge in addition. We need our policing to be
adequately resourced not just to tackle crime and antisocial
behaviour, but to make sure that people feel safe to go out and
be part of our community and of the vibrant nightlife and
shopping experience that we should have in Newcastle. Sadly,
though, we have seen a decline and a collapse in confidence.
We have shoplifting at record levels, with a thousand offences a
day, 90% of crimes going unsolved, victims feeling completely let
down and less neighbourhood policing compared with 2015. Although
this Government have failed to tackle that, we know that there is
another way. Personally, I think we just need a change of
Government to rebuild that confidence and focus, to be tough on
those who blight our towns and to put confidence back into the
economy and our communities so that people can get out there and
be part of the vibrant communities that we are all here to
represent. That needs a Labour Government. We need one as soon as
this Government will allow Parliament to call a general
election.
2.42pm
(Broadland) (Con)
I am grateful to the Opposition for calling this debate, because
it spans the interests of every party, although apparently not
the Liberal Democrats or the Scottish National party. For those
who are taking part in this debate, keeping our town centres safe
is enormously important. That includes all sorts of concerns,
stretching from public disorder not only to more serious violence
on the streets and low-grade antisocial behaviour, which can be
an absolute scourge in our communities, but—this is particularly
important for this debate—to shoplifting and violence associated
with it.
That takes me to the meat of the motion that Labour has put
forward for our consideration today. Its primary suggestion is
that we need a new offence to deal specifically with violence
against shopworkers. Presumably the argument behind that is that
the offence against shopworkers is so different from other
workers or other people on the high street that the tariff
associated with that offence will be in some way different.
I listened carefully to what the shadow Minister, the hon. Member
for Nottingham North () said in his opening remarks,
but it left me confused, because as he is well aware, we already
have section 156 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act
2022, which deals specifically with assaults on those providing a
public service. I think it is common ground among us all that
that includes shopworkers. Under the terms of section 156, which
I will not read out—I will spare the House that—an assault
against a shopworker is considered an aggravating factor. That
leads us to the tariff.
Labour’s position appears to be—I would welcome further
clarification on this, perhaps in the wind-ups—that there is
something so peculiar about a shopworker receiving violence that
the aggravating factors cannot be taken into account adequately
under section 156. I do not understand what aggravating factors
cannot be associated with the section 156 consideration. Surely
the best person to decide the correct tariff is always the
judiciary. That is the judge, who has all the evidence in front
of them, assisted by legislation that clarifies in their mind
what is and is not an aggravating factor according to the views
of Parliament, and assisted by the sentencing guidelines. That is
the right forum to decide the tariff for this kind of
offence.
If we start going down to individual offences, so that we have a
specific offence for shop workers, what about bus drivers? They
are public servants who are exposed to the public. It is clearly
outrageous when bus drivers are assaulted by the public in the
course of their duties, which they are. What about that offence
is less serious and requires a different tariff from those of
shop workers? That is the logic of this motion from Labour. My
concern is that by going for an eye-catching initiative—my
suspicion is that this motion has been tabled to get a
headline—Labour is doing an enormous disservice to the criminal
justice system, when we need to empower our courts to assess the
gravity of offences and let the judiciary, assisted by the
sentencing guidelines, come to the right tariff .
I note in passing that Labour voted against Third Reading of the
Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022. In my submission,
we already have sensible legislation that deals with aggravating
features for people serving the public, which those on the
Government Benches voted for and Labour voted against. It begs
the question: why was the measure so bad then and why is it so
good now?
The second part of Labour’s plan is the roll-out of something
called a town centre policing plan. Perhaps Opposition Members
failed to notice that on 23 October, the Government launched
their own retail crime action plan. There are striking
similarities, because our plan changes the priorities of the
police and requires them to prioritise attendance at shoplifting,
particularly shoplifting with violence, shoplifting where a
suspect has been detained and shoplifting where it is necessary
for the police to attend to secure evidence. Those are exactly
the kind of things that we want the police to attend, to
reinforce the public’s faith in the argument that every crime
needs to be investigated and brought to justice. As my hon.
Friend the Minister mentioned from the Front Bench in her opening
remarks, no crime is too small to be investigated. The plan also
prioritises hotspot patrols by the police, and it sets up
Pegasus, which is the specialist policing team to deal with
organised crime using shoplifting gangs as a mechanism to drive
revenue. It is important that that is dealt with, too, and I am
glad that the retail crime action plan tackles that.
Labour appears to be announcing or, rather, re-announcing what is
already Government policy. That leads me to the third part of its
plan, which is to announce 13,000 extra police and PCSOs to be
used in town centres. I mention in passing that the comfortable
majority of that number is PCSOs, not police officers. That
appears to be dressing up a £360 million investment and ignoring
the £3.6 billion investment that the Government have already put
into the police, generating 20,000 extra police officers in the
past three years. [Interruption.] From a sedentary position, the
hon. Member for Pontypridd () says that we cut them.
I can tell her that we have 1,897 police officers serving in
Norfolk right now—more than ever before. That is an increase of
269 officers, which is driving down crime and increasing the
capture of criminals in Norfolk, particularly in Broadland.
I wonder whether we should have confidence in Labour’s plans. It
is either re-announcing Government plans or going for an
eye-catching initiative, rather than looking for serious changes
to the legislation. Let us look at Labour’s action in practice.
Recorded crime is 34% higher in areas with Labour police and
crime commissioners than in Conservative areas. The lived
experience of all our constituents is that when Labour is in
charge, crime is much higher, yet the Conservative record is that
non-fraud crime has fallen since 2010. There has been a 50% fall
in reported crimes, but let us look at the gold standard, which
is the crime survey of England and Wales. By March 2023, our
constituents’ experience of crime had dropped by 15% since before
covid, and by a whopping 54% since 2010. That is even higher than
the reported crime reduction.
Finally, I had a conversation with a seasoned senior officer in
Norfolk, who said, “When I started out, if we had had the crime
numbers that we have now, I’d have bitten your arm off.” Crime
has fallen under the Conservative Government, and we should
recognise that in this debate.
2.51pm
(Luton South) (Lab)
The comments of the right hon. and learned Member for Northampton
North (Sir ) have support across the
House, particularly those about safety and security for
everybody, and about tackling all forms of racism and hate
crimes. However, the Conservative Government have overseen the
demise of town centres across the country, which is a key part of
the failure to tackle town centre crime such as street drinking,
harassment and littering. After 13 years, their legacy is one of
damaging decline and collapsing confidence, and victims and
communities have paid the price.
Antisocial behaviour has a devastating impact on communities and
individuals. Over 90% of crimes are going unsolved, meaning that
criminals are now less than half as likely to be caught than
under the last Labour Government. Shoplifting has reached record
levels and is driven by organised criminal gangs, with a 25%
surge nationally over the past 12 months alone and 1,000 offences
a day. Shoplifting is not a victimless crime. Theft from shops
has long been a major flashpoint for violence and abuse against
shop workers, and far too many shop workers face abuse and
violence in our town centres.
The trade union USDAW’s latest survey results show that two
thirds of its members working in retail suffer abuse from
customers, with far too many experiencing threats and violence.
Six in 10 of these incidents were triggered by theft from shops,
which is clearly the result of a 25% increase in incidents of
shoplifting, as shown by the latest ONS statistics, so I want to
put on record my support for USDAW’s important Freedom From Fear
campaign to prevent violence, threats and abuse against workers.
Labour supports increasing protections for shop workers and will
table amendments to the Criminal Justice Bill to ensure that
there are tougher sentences for attacks on our shop workers.
Everyone should have the right to work in safety and to live free
from fear.
In Luton, we are proud of our community and the way Labour-run
Luton Borough Council and local businesses continue to work
together to improve safety in our town centre for everyone. It is
good to see the Luton business improvement district team working
with Luton Borough Council to support the night-time economy and
improve night-time security by funding additional neighbourhood
enforcement and security officers in the town centre to help
prevent crime and improve safety for residents and businesses.
That commitment to creating a safe, vibrant and inclusive
nightlife for all has seen Luton town centre awarded purple flag
status again, which I am pleased to see, and Luton Borough
Council’s 2040 town centre masterplan will create a safer,
cleaner and greener town centre. However, the need for Luton’s
community to step up and support itself is a consequence of the
Conservative Government’s 13 years of failure—13 years of cuts to
our local services, cuts to youth services and cuts to bus
services, and 13 years of rising poverty, pushing people away
from our town centres and high streets and, sadly, sometimes into
more desperate measures.
The issues facing our town centres would be addressed by Labour’s
community policing guarantee. It includes scrapping the threshold
brought in by the Tories in 2014 that prevents the prosecution of
shoplifting under the value of £200, making it easier to take
action against repeat offenders and ending the farce of offending
going unpunished. It would create a new, specific standalone
offence of violence against a shop worker, roll out town centre
policing plans with guaranteed patrols of town centres, and put
13,000 extra police and community support officers back in town
centres to crack down on antisocial behaviour. Like others have
said, however, for this to happen—for action to make our town
centres safer—we need a Labour Government.
2.56pm
(Bournemouth East) (Con)
It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Luton South
(), and I recognise what my
right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Northampton North
(Sir ) said about communities.
Without speaking out of turn, I hope that we might have a debate
on that very issue—whether it be in Government or, indeed,
Opposition time—because it is so important and so current. I very
much welcome today’s debate, even if I do not necessarily welcome
the motion that goes with it.
Keeping our town centres safe is absolutely critical, but let us
remember that they look different from a decade, two decades or
three decades ago. Our fast-changing, ever digital world is
impacting on every aspect of life: how we live, how we work, how
we do business, how we communicate, how we socialise, how we
entertain and, of course, how we shop. That has inevitably had a
knock-on impact on our town centres, and we also have the global
shocks to our economies of covid and the war in Ukraine, fuelling
the cost of living crisis and the jump in employees no longer
going to work but working from home. It has all been tough for
our town centres. All these factors require local communities,
councils and private sector stakeholders to reinvigorate a sense
of purpose about what our town centres are for in the modern age,
because if they do not, any reduction in activity, attraction,
footfall or busyness in our town centres can and does lead to a
vacuum that is then filled with antisocial behaviour, which
further deters people from coming into our town centres.
Bournemouth has not only a vibrant town centre, but some
attractive commercial, retail and hospitality hubs—for example,
Tuckton, Boscombe High Street, Charminster, the huge Castlepoint
shopping centre, our seafront and Southbourne, where I was
delighted to spend Small Business Saturday. If Members are ever
in that neck of the woods, I strongly recommend Syd’s Slaps
coffee shop, where the staff are very hospitable and certainly
look after their customers. I thank them very much for their
hospitality.
I welcome the Government’s initiatives to support our town
centres, which is what the almost £5 billion levelling-up fund is
all about. For Bournemouth, this equated to over £18 million to
support our seafront offering, and £21 million from the towns
fund for Boscombe. However, when it comes to safety, I am
concerned that ever more young people across the UK are choosing
to carry knives. That is what I want to focus on as the main part
of my speech, because it is leading to ever more people being
harmed or killed by the use of knives. In the last decade, knife
crime has jumped by 75%, which is already impacting on the
night-time economies of too many town centres across Britain.
As a popular seaside town, Bournemouth has a vibrant nightlife,
with thousands of visitors enjoying the night-time hospitality on
any Friday or Saturday night. If we are to prevent Bournemouth
from experiencing a similar rise in knife crime to that we have
sadly seen in other parts of the country, we need action in
Bournemouth now. As I have learned from joining Bournemouth’s
police on a number of night-time patrols, the cause of the
increase both is understood and can be tackled. The increase in
the prevalence of young people carrying knives stems from peer
pressure and a false belief that it is the best way they can
defend themselves if they get into a serious confrontation. Of
course, they are cheap and easy to get hold of.
I am pleased that the Government have banned the carrying of
zombie knives, but we need to do more. I propose two
initiatives—I am pleased to see the Minister for Crime, Policing
and Fire in his place, because he will be familiar with what I am
about to say. The first, relating to police resources, is a
violence reduction unit. Such police units in other parts of the
country have a proven track record in reducing knife crime in
town centres. They do so not just by increasing policing but
through working within the communities, including schools, to
educate youngsters on the dangers of carrying knives. I have
written to the Home Secretary and the Minister to request
that.
Secondly, let us obligate all entertainment premises such as
nightclubs licensed to operate after 11 pm to have metal-detector
systems—either archways or handheld devices called wands—to
guarantee that no one entering the premises is carrying a knife.
I stress that that is not to point any fingers at the
sector—there is rarely trouble inside those premises—but that
would really deter the small but growing minority who choose to
carry lethal weapons. It would also offer reassurance to the
majority of the public who simply want to experience an enjoyable
Saturday night out. Such measures are already in place in venues
across the country, including for sports functions and in public
buildings such as where we are today. I have written not only to
the Home Secretary but to Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole
Council asking the licensing committee to make that part of any
licence to run premises. A statutory instrument will be required
here to empower licensing committees to operate in that way.
Bournemouth has developed an enviable reputation over the decades
as an attractive, safe seaside town for all the family. Today,
there is a vibrant night-time economy trying to avoid knife
crime, but we need robust action now to stamp out the worrying
trend of carrying knives.
I am pleased to see police numbers now at record levels, even
compared with 2010. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for
Nottingham North (), was keen to repeat that
police numbers had indeed fallen over the period. He was less
eager to clarify why tough choices were taken by the Government
at the time that impacted on every Government budget across
Whitehall. He really does need to recognise that and put the
figures into context. I did not want to see police numbers go
down, and I certainly did not want to see any reduction in any
Government Departments. Unfortunately, we inherited a financial
crisis that we had to endure and recover from.
I am pleased—and I hope the hon. Member for Nottingham North
concurs—that numbers have returned to what they should have been
over the last decade and are at record levels, as we heard from
the Minister in her opening remarks. I end by repeating my
earlier intervention. There are other factors as well, but our
town centres are largely safe because of what our police do, and
it is worth giving them gratitude for what they do and the
service they provide. They do so with less thanks than they
should be given. As I have stressed, they start the day not
knowing how things will unfold. We owe them a huge debt of
gratitude. I am pleased by what they do in Dorset and in
Bournemouth. I give them thanks for the service they provide.
3.04pm
(Tamworth) (Lab)
I thank the right hon. Member for Bournemouth East (Mr Ellwood)
for his contribution on knife crime and its effects on the
community. Only last week, in my maiden speech, I paid tribute to
my predecessor, Sir Robert Peel, who pioneered the leading
principles of policing, which ring as true today as they did in
1829. Central to his philosophy was the integral role of rooting
the police force within the community. Tamworth no longer has a
police station with a front desk to report crimes, and many have
raised with me their dismay at the town centre suffering from
increased antisocial behaviour, but it is high-street shoplifting
that I wish to raise specifically in the debate.
High-street retailers are struggling with the increased costs of
their bills and their business rates, reduced profit margins and
worries that footfall will reduce due to concerns about safety in
town centres. To add to that difficulty, under this Government
they are having to absorb up to £200 every time someone steals
from their shop. That is simply not good enough. My constituent
Onkar, who runs a convenience store, raised his concerns with me
about how damaging shoplifting is to his business. He has
reported shoplifting on many occasions but has not seen a single
conviction in 13 years. That also means that he cannot recoup the
costs of those lost goods.
Coupled with that, retail workers face unprecedented rates of
violence, abuse and aggression while doing their jobs. Last year,
survey data from USDAW of more than 7,000 shop workers—it has
been cited many times by colleagues during the debate, but I will
repeat it because it is so stark—reported that 70% suffered from
verbal abuse, 49% received threats of violence, and nearly 8%
were actually physically assaulted during the year. The report
called for:
“Investment in community-led policing initiatives, which
recognise the invaluable role that retail workers play in our
communities and deliver locally-led programmes to guarantee
worker safety.”
That is exactly what Labour’s community policing guarantee will
do.
Labour will put police on the beat again, with a major expansion
in neighbourhood policing, including putting 13,000 more PCSOs on
the streets. Just as Peel professionalised the police force in
1829, Labour will professionalise neighbourhood policing, working
with national bodies such as the College of Policing to create
bespoke problem-solving skills that support communities. Labour
will also introduce a new, specific offence against the assault
of shop workers, which will protect people like Onkar and the
shop workers of USDAW to ensure that everyone who works in retail
can feel safe.
Finally, I pay tribute to the serving members of the police
force, who still do the best they can despite consistent
underfunding and under-resourcing over the last 13 years. I join
colleagues in calling on the Government to take action and back
Labour’s community policing guarantee.
3.07pm
(Cities of London and
Westminster) (Con)
I welcome the debate, because it is so important to talk about
the safety of our town centres and our high streets. In the
Cities of London and Westminster, I am proud that we have what is
perhaps considered the nation’s high street: Oxford Street. We
also have Regent Street and Bond Street. Equally importantly, we
have amazing local neighbourhood high streets, such as Marylebone
high street and St John’s Wood high street—it is not in my
constituency at the moment—which I visited last week for Small
Business Saturday. On my visit, I was shocked to hear from
shopkeepers about the rise in shoplifting. I also recently met
the Marylebone Association in Marylebone high street, where local
people are really concerned about the huge increase in
shoplifting. I have spoken to shopkeepers and heard about the
work that local councillors in Marylebone are doing with local
retail staff. Some are now locking their doors and not allowing
people in until they know who is coming in. Waitrose on
Marylebone high street has taken away so many products—alcohol in
particular—because it has had organised gangs going in,
particularly at certain times, in an organised operation. I would
like to see the local police do a lot more to tackle shoplifting,
particularly in places such as that.
I also welcome the debate today because it is really important
that we talk about the local policing of town centres. I know
that the Government have put dealing with town centre safety very
much at the heart of policing. My hon. Friend the Member for
Broadland () mentioned the Government’s
retail crime action plan, which is important. Things such as the
antisocial behaviour action plan and the safer streets programme
devolve money, funding and action to local communities, councils
and police. I want to highlight the importance of police and
crime commissioners and police chiefs in ensuring that our town
centres and high streets are safe.
In London, we have a rather interesting situation with the Labour
Mayor . Crime has gone up in the seven
years that he has been Mayor, and 11% in the last year alone—that
is 1,100 extra crimes. Research has been done recently on crime
on the tube, which has risen more than 50%, fuelled by thefts and
robberies. People come to the centre to shop or have a good night
out in the night-time economy that we offer in the west end, but
Oxford Circus and Leicester Square are among the worst tube
stations for theft. That has happened under as the police and crime
commissioner for London. My hon. Friend the Member for Old Bexley
and Sidcup (Mr French) raised that issue when he intervened on
the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Nottingham North (), and said that has failed to recruit more than
1,000 extra officers on top of the 3,666 police officers that the
Government have funded with the Met and the City of London
police.
It is important to understand that it is up to local police
teams. In London we have an excellent borough commander, Louise
Puddefoot, ably supported by Chief Superintendent Beth Pirie, but
their hands have been tied in Westminster. We have amazing
neighbourhood police teams but they are often taken away from
their neighbourhood duties to undertake ceremonial and protest
duties, because Westminster is home to more than 500
demonstrations, marches and protests each year, in addition to
the ceremonial activities such as the changing of the guard. I
recently wrote to Assistant Commissioner Rolfe to ask whether the
Met will establish a central police team that will undertake
those ceremonial duties, so that we do not lose our neighbourhood
police teams on a weekly basis. It is important to acknowledge
the excellent work of our neighbourhood police officers, who are
equally frustrated to be taken off neighbourhood duties for
ceremonial duties.
When our neighbourhood police officers are taken away for
ceremonial duties or protests, a huge vacuum is left. There has
been a huge increase in antisocial behaviour around the cathedral
on Victoria Street, Great Peter Street and around St Matthew’s
Primary School. I have been heartbroken to read letters from year
6 children in that school, outlining what they see as they walk
to and from school: men urinating and defecating in the street
outside their school; men and women taking drugs and acting
antisocially. I want more police action on that.
I recently held a local public meeting just off Victoria Street
with the cathedral area residents group. More than 100 people
turned up, and they were sick to the back teeth of dealing with
all the antisocial behaviour in their neighbourhood. It is
imperative that the police and Westminster City Council take a
zero-tolerance approach to it. I am disappointed to report that
in the last 18 months there has been a real increase in
antisocial behaviour across Westminster, particularly people who
are street drinking and begging. I would like the council to do
an awful lot more. I produced a crime plan last year, having
conducted a survey across Westminster to which nearly 5,000
people responded. Their top priority was more police officers on
our street. If we see them in our neighbourhoods and high
streets, that will prevent crime and stop the shoplifting. We
need to get a grip of this.
(Kingston upon Hull East)
(Lab)
If the hon. Lady thinks that we need more police officers, should
she not support Labour’s motion?
I go back to my earlier comment: the Government gave funding to
the Labour Mayor of London, but he failed to use that money to
recruit up to 1,000 extra police officers on top of the 3,600
that the police have funded. That money went back into the pot,
and other police forces have taken advantage of it. Over the last
seven years under we have seen failure, failure,
failure in many areas, but the biggest one has been crime. Any
community across London will say that their biggest concern is
crime and antisocial behaviour. has failed to answer that
concern.
Local people want a zero-tolerance approach to antisocial
behaviour and crime, particularly in our beloved shops including
major brands across Westminster. Last summer I visited Boots in
Piccadilly, and was shocked to hear about the number of incidents
it is dealing with day in, day out. It is the only pharmacy open
at midnight, so people who desperately need medication will go
there. With the night-time economy as it is, Boots staff are
often victims of assaults and shoplifting. They call the police,
but they do not turn up.
In all my meetings with local people over the last year or two on
this issue, that is the biggest concern that they raise: that
when they call the police, they do not turn up. It might not be a
life-threatening issue—someone might not be about to die—but they
want the police to come and deal with someone comatose on the
street or a shoplifter. The public must not give up on the
police. They do an amazing job, and officers are there for us day
in, day out, but they are being let down by the lack of serious
leadership in the police in making sure that our bobbies are on
the beat and doing what they should be doing. The public need to
be encouraged to continue to report crime. I have only just
learned that it is possible to report crime on Twitter or
Facebook. It is really easy. The person reporting it will get a
crime report and can follow it up. The police need information so
that they can put the resources where they are needed.
To conclude, I welcome the opportunity to debate the importance
of town centre and high street safety. We need more police
officers on our streets. In London we have a Labour Mayor who has
let us down time and again. It is not about funding police
officers but about recruiting them and putting them on our
streets.
3.18pm
(Mid Bedfordshire)
(Lab)
Let me start by sharing colleagues’ sentiments on the speech by
my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham North (). It is important to continue
to have cross-party consensus on the importance of stamping out
antisemitism and racism across our streets. I share his horror at
some of the examples he brought to the House’s attention.
Members on both sides of the Chamber who had the opportunity to
come and visit us in Mid Bedfordshire recently may wonder what I
am doing in a debate about town centres. Having spent one or two
hours along Long Drive and trying to find that last house at the
end of a road group, they may wonder whether they somehow missed
the latest Westfield shopping centre at the end of a country
lane. In Mid Bedfordshire we may not have anything quite on the
scale of Oxford Street, but the town centres and hubs in my 48
towns and villages are no less important. From the fantastic
Roger’s Bakery in Meppershall to the Cross Keys pub in Cranfield,
those businesses showcase the very best of what a high street
should be about: the beating heart of the community where we can
all come together. But the heartbreaking reality of much of my
campaign was speaking to people who simply do not feel safe on
those streets anymore.
The Government keep telling us today that we have never had it so
good when it comes to policing in Mid Bedfordshire, but the sad
reality for people in my constituency could not feel more
different. From Shefford to Wixams and from Wootton to Flitwick,
many people just are not feeling safe on their streets. It is
easy to see why: shoplifting up 7% and neighbourhood offences up
across the county of Bedfordshire, but charging of offences
across Bedfordshire down. The result: businesses, customers and
communities left feeling vulnerable and exposed. Our high streets
might not be on the same scale as those of other Members, but
these issues have even greater resonance in my community. Without
the networks of support and the visibility that larger high
streets can provide, my shop owners, communities and shoppers can
feel even more vulnerable when Governments fail to act. That
cannot be right and cannot be left unaddressed.
During the campaign, I was incredibly heartened to see some
cross-party consensus on this issue, with my rival Conservative
party candidate, the local police and crime commissioner no less,
conceding that policing in Bedfordshire was underfunded, that
more needed to be invested in neighbourhood policing and that new
approaches were necessary—with, I hasten to add, very little
pressure from me to do so. But since arriving in this place, I am
sad to say that I have felt that Labour is the only party with
serious answers to these challenges. It should not be rocket
science: it is about creating the thousands of extra
neighbourhood officers we need to create a visible policing
presence on our streets, rooted right across my towns, villages
and communities; making sure we are taking retail crime seriously
by creating a new offence to give extra protection to
shopworkers; ending the floor on offences leading to follow-up
for shoplifting; and having a focus on youth centres and
provision to ensure our young people have better options
available to them than bad choices. Those are the solutions my
communities are crying out for, and they should not have to wait
for a general election to see them.
This is a Government who, for all their faults— I hasten to add
that I might think there are one or two—have not been afraid at
times, in their best moments, to take some of the Labour party’s
ideas and bring them forward, from aspects of Labour’s NHS
workforce plan to getting more investment to our businesses. We
welcome that. I urge those on the Government Benches to take this
opportunity to add another example to that list. Do not let my
communities wait any longer. Do not fall into the temptation of
self-indulgence and pre-emptive leadership bids in the last few
months of this Parliament. Let us get something done together for
our communities and support Labour’s common-sense plan to take
our high streets back, keep them safe, and invest to enable the
neighbourhood policing my towns and villages are crying out
for.
3.22pm
(Stoke-on-Trent North)
(Con)
It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Mid Bedfordshire
(), who did a sterling
job of representing his constituency with the pride and passion
that I like to think I always give to my own speeches about the
fine constituency of Stoke-on-Trent North, Kidsgrove and
Talke.
I am delighted that the Government have reached and exceeded
their target to recruit 20,000 police officers, and that 333 are
coming to the great county of Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire.
They will help to ensure that we can have neighbourhood policing
in our communities, as modelled by the fantastic new chief
constable Chris Noble. He is doing sterling work to ensure that
officers are on the beat, out and about in their community, and
standing up for the interests of the people day in, day out.
My hon. Friend the Member for Broadland (), sadly no longer in his
place, did a sterling job of explaining why the motion is more
election gimmick than reality. However, I accept and understand
the passion that the shadow police Minister, the hon. Member for
Nottingham North (), has in this area. He takes
it very seriously indeed. I am always happy to sit down and
discuss any forthcoming amendments, seeing as how in recent times
I have ended up in the Lobby on the wrong side of the Chamber
more than I should.
In Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent, we have had antisocial
behaviour hotspot funding from the Government, which the police,
fire and crime commissioner , who is doing a fantastic job
for our community, has implemented so successfully that we have
seen a 20% reduction in antisocial behaviour in those hotspot
areas so far. The investment by the Conservative Government under
a Conservative police, fire and crime commissioner, with a
Conservative county council and nearly all 12 Staffordshire
Members of Parliament—albeit that we have recently had one new
addition in red—has made sure that we are delivering on the
priorities of the people in our local area.
Stoke-on-Trent has benefited greatly from around £3 million in
safer streets funding, with around £2 million having already been
secured under the former Conservative-led council. That has seen
investment in places such as Longton, which my hon. Friend the
Member for Stoke-on-Trent South () serves. We are now seeing a
£250,000 investment in one of the great towns of our city,
Tunstall. I passionately campaigned for that investment to
improve our street lighting to make sure women and girls in
particular feel safe in our community, as well as to make sure we
have digital CCTV to help the police on the beat. I was backed by
over 700 local residents who signed my petition and by the
police, fire and crime commissioner.
Sadly, I was not backed by the leader of Stoke-on-Trent City
Council, the Labour council member for Burslem ward. She told me
to my face that no money was going to come to Tunstall, and that
my petition was meaningless because it was on my own website and
that the constituents I serve therefore did not matter. I lodged
a complaint with the electoral officer at the council. Sadly, he
whitewashed that particular complaint. It was very sad to see the
passive-aggressive nature with which she approached that meeting,
making a member of my staff feel incredibly uncomfortable, as
well as denigrating the very people I am proud to stand up for
and serve—the people of my constituency, some of whom are also
her constituents. That goes to show that Labour may talk the
talk, but it does not walk the walk when it comes to delivering
for the people of Stoke-on-Trent, Kidsgrove and Talke.
I am delighted that we got backing and funding, but there is of
course more to be done. Now I want funding for Cobridge, which,
between January and December 2022, saw a 75% increase in
neighbourhood crime. It is important that we get the CCTV, street
lighting and alley gates that we need to help that community feel
safe. I will be looking for future rounds of safer streets
funding, and I will be getting the signatures of local
people.
I hope that this time the Labour-run council will get behind
that, rather than playing petty party politics. It denigrated me
for calling out the tiny minority of scrotes who deal drugs, the
scumbags who fly-tip and the savages who create antisocial
behaviour issues in our community. I was proud to say it in that
video at the time and I am proud to say it again now, because I
will not let a tiny minority of people ruin my town centre,
despite all the investment that has gone in, from the £7 million
to refurbish Tunstall town hall to the £3.5 million to open a
brand-new living quarters for the over-50s in the former Tunstall
Library and Baths. We have seen record funding in Kidsgrove, with
the town centre hub on its way, a new pump track for young people
to use, and the sports centre refurbished and reopened. All those
things provide activities for our young people and our elderly to
enjoy in our communities, helping to give the police an
opportunity to engage with the local community to make sure that
the overwhelming majority of law-abiding residents who do the
right thing day in, day out are rightly rewarded and treated with
the respect that they deserve.
Until recently, I had a Labour-run Kidsgrove Town Council. I was
delighted when a campaign I successfully led meant that it was
allowed to use some of its funding to finally put in new and
improved CCTV. The Conservatives took that council in May 2022
for the first time ever. We have had investment in Bathpool Park,
Clough Hall Park, Whitehall Avenue, Birchenwood, King Street and
Heathcote Street, which means that CCTV can help to tackle the
scourge of antisocial behaviour that happens at times in those
particular areas.
I am grateful to the residents of Kidsgrove, Talke, Newchapel,
Harriseahead, Mow Cop and Butt Lane for backing the campaign to
give them that protection and aid our police, who no longer have
to use the outdated CCTV system that required them to wait for a
shop to open to go and use a VCR—I did not realise that those
still existed—to download the videotape. Now that the cameras are
monitored 24 hours a day from the Stoke-on-Trent control room,
people can feel safe, because a Conservative Member of
Parliament—the first ever Conservative Member of Parliament in
Stoke-on-Trent North, Kidsgrove and Talke—has made sure, along
with Conservative councillors, that we are delivering for our
local area. [Interruption.]
I hear a bit of sedentary chuntering. Perhaps the hon. Member for
Nottingham North is hoping for my demise, but whenever the
election comes, I will be knocking on doors and telling people
what is happening—I look forward to it. We had 70 years of Labour
rotting our community away, taking it for granted and assuming
that people were just cannon fodder for their votes, but now a
Conservative has come and delivered for their area.
As I have said, a new Staffordshire community policing model was
introduced in February 2022 under the excellent new chief
constable, Chris Noble. Officers in 10 areas, alongside the
neighbourhood police officers and police community support
officers, are now helping to ensure that communities and
businesses feel they have the safety and security that they need.
I want to give a shout-out to a very special individual, Sergeant
Chris Gifford, or “Giff”, as he is known by the bobbies on the
beat. I was proud to do a night shift with him, and although he
did not take the opportunity to put me in a cell and take a
photograph, which would doubtless have earned him a lot of money,
we did have a great opportunity to look around our neighbourhood
and see the police on the beat.
I witnessed the power of the neighbourhood policing that Members
on both sides of the House have espoused today. The knowledge
that those officers gather on a daily basis, the individuals they
are able to spot from a distance—I would never be able to
identify someone that far away—and their ability to deal with
offenders are invaluable to the local community, and they have my
absolute support. I want to thank Sergeant Gifford and his team
for allowing me to join them on the beat, and I look forward to
doing so again soon.
We are trying not to let the woke arrive in Stoke-on-Trent,
although the Labour party is desperately trying to import it up
there. We do not want the chai latte and avocado brigade arriving
in our area any time soon. I must say that I was very
disappointed to see in the papers that Staffordshire police had
introduced woke guidance: you cannot say “spokesman” or
“policeman”, for example. I can only assume that that must
emanate from the abysmal former chief constable, Gareth Morgan,
who was a disgrace to the uniform, regularly sitting in his
office without emerging to walk the streets with the local
Members of Parliament in Stoke-on-Trent, unwilling to go out and
tackle the issues of the day. In fact, morale was so low in the
Staffordshire police force as a result of his appalling
leadership—he was busy crying on camera, rather than actually
delivering with the bobbies on the beat—that we had a recruitment
and retention crisis. Thankfully he decided to finally disappear
and be forgotten about. Now we have a great chief constable with
great officers on the ground who are doing great things for our
local community, and I assure the House that I am glad to see the
back of Gareth Morgan.
I want to express my gratitude to those brave men and women in
uniform who, day in, day out, serve our country and our
communities, risking their lives and their safety for the
freedoms that we are able to enjoy. I hope that if one day—it may
come sooner than I wish—I am no longer in the House, I will be
able to join the special constables, although I am sure that will
prompt dread in the chief constable of Staffordshire.
I want to record my thanks to the great officers of that county.
I want to thank Chief Inspector John Owen, who oversees the
Newcastle-under-Lyme neighbourhood policing team and who I
recently joined for a walkabout in Kidsgrove. I want to thank
Chief Inspector Scott McGrath, who is in charge of the
Stoke-on-Trent North neighbourhood policing team, and Inspector
Hayley Eaton, his deputy; PC Jonathan Tench, who covers Burslem,
Smallthorne, Baddeley Green, Milton and Norton; and PC Rachel
Ford, who covers Tunstall with PCSO Sue Wall. Two of our finest
officers, PC Edward Clarke and PCSO Anderson Cadman, will join me
later today at 10 Downing Street to attend a reception to thank
them for their service. They represent the very best of
Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire, and I am immensely proud to be
their Member of Parliament—as I hope to be for many years to
come.
I am sorry to interrupt, because the hon. Gentleman is making
such a powerful speech. I join him in paying tribute to all those
officers. Does he not think it a shame that they have endured a
17% real-terms pay cut in recent years, and does he not think
they should be rewarded for their hard work and effort?
I think the hon. Lady has forgotten the 7% rise in police officer
pay that we saw this year. I have spoken to those officers about
their living and how they work on the job, and they have of
course raised with me the fact that money can be tight, but they
understand that the Government have to be sensible with the
public purse and cannot be seen to run amok with it, and they
understand that any more money going into salaries may lead to
less investment in new equipment and the technology that we need
to track more crime. It may deprive them of the additional
training for which they are desperate, because that is what
enables them to patrol our streets. I am proud that our police
are doing such a great job in recruiting 333 brand-new officers
for Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire, in addition to the record
numbers we are seeing across the United Kingdom. It is great news
for our communities.
I like the hon. Member for Halifax () a lot; she is a fine Member
of Parliament—I know that will not help her on Twitter and I
apologise for the grief she will now get—but she talks about
Labour running police and crime, and I cannot think of anything
worse, personally. The wokery that we saw the former chief
constable bring in will trickle into our police force and we will
see the police arresting people for thought crimes and nonsense
like that, rather than having bobbies on the beat where they need
to be, locking up the scumbags, scrotes and savages—that tiny
minority who ruin it for the overwhelming law-abiding majority of
our great community of Stoke-on-Trent North, Kidsgrove and
Talke.
Mr Deputy Speaker ( )
Follow that, .
3.34pm
(Birmingham, Yardley)
(Lab)
As a member of the wokerati, I absolutely will. I gently point
out that the wokerati were coming alive in Woke-on-Trent under
the current Government. I urge the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent
North () not to be so fearful. I
will take my lead from him in praising some of the officers. I
want to praise our local copper, a police officer called Orla
Jenkins. Such a rock star is she to my staff that when she came
to visit my office recently, they put a countdown on the board to
show how excited they were to see her. Local police officers who
do the beating heart of the work in our communities deserve all
of our praise.
On the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Halifax
() about the findings of lots of
different people, the Social Market Foundation last year revealed
that police officers’ pay had declined by 17% in real terms. Not
last week but the week before, 24 coppers came knocking at my
door—[Laughter.] Not last week but the week before, I got in a
cab from Euston to an appointment that I had in London and the
person driving my taxi was a sergeant in the Metropolitan police.
He told me that on his off days he drives cabs. He also told me
that his inspector, also in the Metropolitan police,
did Deliveroo That is the
reality, and what I have heard today, certainly from the Minister
and from the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent North in his rousing
speech, is fantasy. I respect the hon. Gentleman’s
electioneering—it was absolutely top class—but does he know what
the British public absolutely hate? They hate it when we stand in
front of them and say, “Everything’s fine, isn’t it great, we are
world leading,” but then when they call for a copper, nobody
comes.
I had a security guard from the local B&Q in my constituency
come to see me. He had previously worked in the Prison Service
and he wanted to talk to me about strategies for preventing
people who end up in prison from ending up there, and I was
grateful to him for that. He also came in to tell me that he gets
up at 3 o’clock in the morning to call 101 to report the crimes
that have happened in B&Q that day because he cannot get
through in the daytime. He told me that the impunity that he sees
in his store is such that, on the day he came to see me, somebody
had stolen a hot tub from B&Q. If people think they can get
away with that level of crime, it is because criminals have never
had it so good. There has never been a better time to break the
law, with charging rates on the floor and hardly any crimes being
detected. To bring people back to reality—in this amazing world
we are pretending we live in—this applies even to the most
serious cases. I recently dealt with a case where a woman whose
husband was on bail for trying to kill her turned up at her house
with a machete—the evidence was on a Ring doorbell camera—and
five days later the police officers came.
I could stand here and say that all sorts of things need to
change in police forces. I am here all day for better standards
and better training, and for much more prioritisation of the kind
of crimes I am talking about, but the reality is that that is
like hoping for something that cannot exist while police officers
across our country are expected to pick up the pieces of a
crumbling society in every other regard.
Mr Ellwood
I have a lot of respect for the hon. Lady, and we have done a few
gigs together, including “Question Time”. I hesitate to pose this
question, because I do not want to take away from where she is
going, but she mentions society, which is quite personal to me. I
am concerned that there is too much of a “walk on by” society.
She mentions the theft of a hot tub, for example. Would she
concur that there is a role for the general public? I do not want
to encourage them to put themselves in danger but, collectively,
the people who are around, not the police, are the first
responders. They should perhaps react a bit more positively and
proactively in calling out bad behaviour.
I absolutely agree with the right hon. Gentleman, in that I am a
proper intervener. I will cross the road to have a fight. I have
intervened in many domestic abuse situations while out door
knocking. In fact, when I was door knocking for my hon. Friend
the Member for Batley and Spen (), I walked into somebody’s
house to break up a domestic abuse incident. After years of
working with offenders and victims, I am more than capable of
accurately risk assessing a situation and intervening. I do not
suggest for one second that anybody else who was door knocking
with me could have done the same thing. We have to be very
careful in how we manage that.
The trouble is that people in my constituency will tell the right
hon. Member for Bournemouth East (Mr Ellwood), as they tell me,
that they try to intervene. They see drug deals on their street
every single day and they try to do something about it—they
organise neighbourhood meetings, the local neighbourhood police
come along and we all agree that it is a terrible problem—but
when they ring about these hotspots, nobody comes and nothing
changes. It is the same drug dealers, with the same dispossessed
people walking up the street like zombies, every single day. They
do not bother to report it any more, because there is no
point.
On burglary, the police have become a third arm of the insurance
companies. For a lot of people, the police are just there so that
they can get a crime reference number. Orla Jenkins is a cracking
copper and, more than anything, she just rings up people to give
them a crime reference number. That is not why she went into
policing. Officers are pulled away, and I have given the example
of officers sitting and waiting in A&E for hours and
hours.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham West and Royton () mentioned, the proliferation
of unregulated exempt accommodation is one of the single biggest
reasons for call-outs in the city where I live. Hundreds of
millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money is spent on putting
vulnerable people in inappropriate accommodation in our
neighbourhoods, and the police are repeatedly called out. When I
went on response with the police, every call we went to was to
vulnerable people’s exempt accommodation in the city, and I was
much better suited to that work than the police officers, because
I ran vulnerable people’s accommodation for years.
For years, we have been asking the Government to regulate. Every
single time I have asked a Minister for regulation to address
this terrible, dangerous, exploitative accommodation, which
causes antisocial behaviour on every street in Birmingham, on
every street in Manchester and all across Oldham, as has been
said—it might not be happening in rural communities, but it is
happening in our urban communities, and it will be happening in
Stoke-on-Trent—the Government have said to me, “We just don’t
have parliamentary time to legislate on that yet. There isn’t
parliamentary time.” I have been told that twice. So hundreds of
thousands of pounds—hundreds of millions of pounds—of taxpayers’
money is going to bad landlords, housing crack addicts alongside
rape victims. This is the country that has been created. It is
causing harm, and the Government have the power to stop it, to
regulate that accommodation and to end what would be at least
half of all antisocial behaviour in the city where I live. They
have the power to do it, but they do not, so the police get
called out, and called out, and called out forever. That is a
waste of their time, and it is something that the Government are
directly responsible for, and could end.
I could make the same speech about the degradation of mental
health services across our country, for every police officer who
sits for 24 hours in a house because there is no emergency
response any more. There is no protection for people when they
are suffering suicide ideations, so a copper sits with them for
hours. By the way, in my area there are 800 fewer police officers
than there were in 2010. So much for “the best since records ever
began!” If population is taken into account, the situation is
even worse. [Interruption.] Would the hon. Member for
Stoke-on-Trent South () like to intervene? No?
Okay. I would welcome it; as I said, I am big on
intervention.
rose—
Go for it. Cracking!
I reassure the hon. Lady that I completely concur with her views
that our brave police officers should not have to sit with people
with severe mental health disorders to keep them safe, when that
is the job of the other emergency services. I will happily stand
shoulder to shoulder with her and badger Government in any way
necessary if there is time for legislation, because supporting
our police officers should be an absolute priority of this
Government.
Mr Deputy Speaker ( )
Order. I am hoping to get on to the wind-ups by about 4.10 pm,
for 10 minutes each, and we can then start the next debate
shortly after that.
I welcome that intervention. Very noisy people from the midlands
are my favourite. I actually think Stoke-on-Trent is in the
north, but we are splitting hairs now.
I just think the gall to suggest that everything is all right
looks really crass to the public. If hon. Members want to
electioneer, as many of them seemed to want to do today, I
suggest that they change that patter and do the things that they
can do centrally, rather than blaming everybody else.
Mr Deputy Speaker
If the remaining three speakers would speak for about seven
minutes, we could keep to time—and Mr Brereton is going to show
us how to do it.
3.47pm
(Stoke-on-Trent South)
(Con)
Although I do not agree with everything that the hon. Member for
Birmingham, Yardley () said, I agree with some
points that she made. In Stoke-on-Trent we certainly see some of
the issues that she mentioned.
I am pleased to speak in this Opposition day debate on keeping
our town centres safe. I know that Members across the House care
about that, but it is important to reflect that crime has halved
in the period since 2010. That has made a massive difference,
thanks to the work of this Government. We have started to see
great new uses coming into our high streets to fill some of the
empty spaces, and more community-led events. I know, however,
that people locally in Stoke-on-Trent and across north
Staffordshire want to feel safer when visiting our town centres
and high streets. That is why this Government have been
delivering the additional 20,000 police officers nationally, with
an additional 333 specifically for Staffordshire and
Stoke-on-Trent.
Although having more police on the beat is always welcome and
very much needed, it is not the only action needed to address the
issues that we face and to ensure that our town centres are
safer. The Opposition motion is far too focused on narrow issues,
assuming that further increasing the number of police officers is
the magic solution, when actually we need to do a number of
things.
There have certainly been issues when it comes to safety in our
towns and on our high streets in Longton, Fenton and Meir, which
are the main high streets in my constituency, and those issues
are regularly raised with me. We have seen instances of
antisocial behaviour, with shop owners having windows smashed,
and more serious criminal damage with theft from businesses. It
is terrible to see shop owners, who have put everything they have
into running their small businesses, targeted by mindless
vandals. We condemn those who attack and target shop workers—they
must face the full force of the law. I welcome the actions the
Government have taken through the retail crime action plan, the
Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022, and now the
Sentencing Bill.
Most shockingly, in Longton town centre, the Dougie Mac hospice
charity shop was targeted, with its windows smashed. I say to
those who have behaved in this absolutely despicable way, “Think
about the impact on local small businesses that cannot afford to
repair the damage. You do not know when you or a family member
may need the help of organisations like the Dougie Mac
hospice.”
I welcome antisocial behaviour action plans to help people
locally to take back control of our high streets. Only last
Friday, I was out and about in Longton for one of our regular
week-of-action walkabouts, with representatives from
Staffordshire police, the city council and Staffordshire Fire and
Rescue Service. I thank all the officers who were out with me. We
reported a number of issues, and those fantastic officers are
doing an excellent job trying to tackle and get on top of some of
them. It was positive to hear that some of those who have
targeted the town centre recently are now behind bars, thanks to
the work of Staffordshire police.
In Longton, too many people have been getting away with horrific,
mindless acts of criminality, particularly because of the lack of
CCTV. Longton has the lowest coverage of any town centre in the
Stoke-on-Trent area and that is why I have been working closely
with our Staffordshire police, fire and crime commissioner,
, and I am delighted that Longton
town centre is set to benefit from the latest round of safer
streets funding.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent North (), who is no longer in his
place, said, we are receiving around half a million pounds for
Longton and Tunstall from the safer streets fund. That will make
a massive difference in delivering significantly enhanced CCTV
coverage for the town centres, which they desperately need, so
that nobody can escape the focus of the law. It will ensure that
those who target our town centres face the action they deserve.
Funding will be used to improve the area, including gating off
some of the alleyways that have been a major attraction for
antisocial behaviour.
One of the most significant issues facing local towns has been
the impact of drug misuse, particularly the horrific drug monkey
dust. As hon. Members know, I have been campaigning vociferously
to get that horrific drug reclassified from the current class B
to class A. The reason monkey dust is so damaging is that it does
not just have a corrosive effect on the health of those who
consume it; it also causes serious violence and antisocial
behaviour in our communities, particularly our town centres.
Given its psychoactive properties, those under its influence have
been seen to exhibit zombie-like and often superhuman behaviour,
with police officers reporting that someone under its influence
requires eight or more officers to restrain them. This horrific
drug is highly addictive and far too cheaply and widely available
in our towns, despite the best efforts of Staffordshire police
and others. It is essential for this drug and other synthetic
cathinones to be reclassified, as I have been calling for, to
drive up the costs and consequences for the horrific dealers.
The provision of temporary accommodation in our town centres has
also been a major concern and contributed significantly to
antisocial behaviour. The Crown Hotel in Longton, right in the
middle of our town centre, was used during the pandemic by local
authorities to provide homeless accommodation. I refer the House
to my declaration in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests
as a trustee of a local homeless charity in Stoke-on-Trent. Given
the urgent need during the pandemic, it was absolutely right
immediately to get people into that accommodation, but we are now
more than three years on and more permanent accommodation is yet
to be delivered.
The police have said that between January and May 2022 that one
location generated 108 incidents. Between January and May this
year it had dropped slightly to 76 incidents, but that is still
an incident every two days. Of the individuals housed, it has
been said that
“many…were homeless and included many individuals with chaotic
lifestyles/complex needs with insufficient structure or support
in place.”
It is quite clear that these individuals, many of whom have
serious addiction and mental health problems, need far more
intensive treatment and support than can ever be provided at the
Crown.
As I have said on several occasions, I call on the Labour-led
council to cease use of the Crown Hotel. I am extremely concerned
about the shocking safeguarding risks being taken by
Stoke-on-Trent City Council when it comes to housing families
with children at the Crown, thereby exposing children to totally
unregulated settings alongside often highly dysfunctional
individuals. The current situation is not in the best interests
of anyone—not of those housed there and certainly not of
Longton.
As I have said, the challenges faced in our town centres are not
as simple as just creating a few more police officers: we also
need more proactive action from local authorities, particularly
given the need for greater enforcement in town centres. It is
about not just criminal enforcement but the use of civil powers.
I have been pleased to support the use of the shared prosperity
fund for such purposes, creating some much-needed town centre
wardens and heritage enforcement officers.
The move to online has resulted in our town centre being in a
serious state of decline and our high street suffering
significantly. We have some proactive owners, but we have also
seen owners who are not taking responsibility. We need further
action to ensure the enforcement that is needed. We must use a
carrot-and-stick approach, and I very much hope that we will see
further action.
I bring to the attention of my right hon. and hon. Friends my
private Member’s Bill, which I will soon lay before the House. It
is very much focused on ensuring that local authorities have a
duty to review the condition of our high streets and put together
action plans to deal with some of the issues. I very much hope
that Members from all parties will support my Bill and the work I
am doing to call for further action to address the decline of our
high streets and some of the related issues. It is not just about
more police on the beat. We need to take a number of actions to
address the issues and I hope we see further Government action
moving forward.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Deputy Speaker ( )
Order. That was a very long seven minutes, but I am sure that
will do better.
3.57pm
(Batley and Spen) (Lab)
I will do my very best, Mr Deputy Speaker. I am going to follow
the lead of my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Yardley
() and focus on the reality of
the situation on the ground for my constituents in Batley and
Spen. I also thank her for her one-woman crime-fighting endeavour
when she was in my constituency.
Our town centres are the lifeblood of our communities. In my
constituency, people are incredibly proud of where they are from
and often identify, first and foremost, with their immediate
locality, whether that is Batley or Spen. The Spen valley is made
up of a fantastic collection of towns and villages, all with
their own strong local identity. I know how important that is
because I was born and brought up there and have never lived
anywhere else. There is Heckmondwike, where I went to school;
Mirfield just down the road, where I had my first full-time job;
Gomersal and Liversedge, where I have both lived and worked; and
Birstall, Birkenshaw, Oakenshaw, Cleckheaton, Scholes, Roberttown
and many more. All of them are special, but sadly all of them are
also too often ignored by a Government who over 13 years have
shown themselves to be totally out of touch with the day-to-day
reality of the lives of so many people I represent.
I have worked closely with West Yorkshire police to tackle the
scourges of dangerous driving, crime and antisocial behaviour in
Batley and Spen, and they tell me how the cuts to police numbers
and resources over the years have left them unable to serve the
community as they would wish. They all want to do a great job,
but it is increasingly difficult to do it as they would wish.
Members should not take my word for it: the chief constable of
West Yorkshire police, John Robins, made the point very clearly
on BBC Radio Leeds in June. He is not political; he just wants to
do the best for his officers and for the community. As John
Robins said:
“We are able to deal with the most serious incidents in policing,
from terrorism to serious organised crime, homicide and serious
violence, but as you go down the list of issues, when you get
towards visibility, engagement, patrols and neighbourhood
policing, that’s the one that comes under the most pressure.”
He added:
“The saddest thing for the people of West Yorkshire and the UK is
that’s the one the public see most and want the most of.”
Before the Conservatives try to claim credit for the most recent
recruitment of officers, which of course I welcome, they need to
recognise the serious damage already done by all those years of
neglect, and acknowledge that they are simply giving back a few
of the officers they have taken away. The chief constable
compared the situation to people’s household budgets, and he is
right. He said that
“through cost of living and mortgage increases people haven’t got
the money that they want to live their life with… Since 2010
that’s what it has been like for policing. We’re 2,000 less
officers and staff, £140m less—I can’t deliver what I want to
deliver as a professional police officer.”
I met the Police Federation in Parliament last week, who also
spoke candidly about the challenges faced by officers on the
ground as a result of reduced numbers, retention and recruitment
issues, and the impact on the mental health of their officers and
their ability to do their job as they would wish to do it—adding
again to the mental health crisis that has already been spoken
about in this debate. I thank the fantastic neighbourhood police
team in Batley and Spen for everything they do to keep our
communities safe, but I know from the many conversations I have
had with them that it is an uphill battle.
Our towns and villages deserve better than they have received
under the Tories in many ways. The cost of living crisis has hit
individuals and businesses alike, with inflation, rising interest
rates and spiralling energy costs making life incredibly
difficult. Labour’s plans for economic stability, growth, green
investment, a warm homes fund, the abolition of business rates
and reform of the NHS and social care sectors, all on the basis
of strict fiscal responsibility, will make a huge difference.
First and foremost, though, people have a right to feel safe and
to know that the police will be there when they are needed. I
have received countless messages from constituents about speeding
and reckless driving, selfish and dangerous parking, when
pavements should be for people, criminal activity, including drug
dealing, going on openly on the streets, and antisocial behaviour
of all kinds, including the use of off-road bikes. It is not
right that people should be expected to put up with such a state
of affairs. It does not have to be like this.
That is why I am incredibly proud of the Labour party’s plans for
a new community policing guarantee, announced by my right hon.
Friend the Leader of the Opposition at conference, which means
guaranteed town centre patrols with 13,000 more neighbourhood
police and PCSOs on the streets. Local people will be involved in
setting local policing priorities and we will have tough new
sentencing guidelines for assaults on retail workers, as already
discussed—something that USDAW and many others have campaigned
for brilliantly—and stronger police action on shoplifting.
Local councils, the police and the courts will be empowered to
introduce zero-tolerance zones in town centres to help to crack
down on antisocial behaviour. I was horrified to hear the stories
from staff at Tesco in Cleckheaton recently about the dreadful
abuse and attacks they face on a day-to-day basis. We cannot have
small business owners and shopworkers feeling unsafe at work, and
we cannot have local people feeling scared to go into their local
town centre or village to do their shopping or to socialise.
As well as the many fantastic shops in my constituency’s towns
and villages, they also have brilliant community centres, pubs,
restaurants and cafés. They are places not only where people come
together with family and friends, but where many fantastic
community events take place and people have a chance to meet
others from different backgrounds. That is really important for
community cohesion and for addressing loneliness and social
isolation.
However, many of those venues are struggling. I pay tribute to
the chambers of trade up and down the country for the fantastic
work they do in building strong towns and villages, including in
my constituency, where we have the Birstall chamber of trade,
Batley Business Association and the Spenborough chamber of trade
and commerce. They are often run by volunteers and amazing local
businesspeople who are at the heart of our communities.
A future Labour Government will offer individuals, businesses and
communities not only a promise of financial security, but the
physical security that we all need to be able to rely on as we go
about our daily lives. The people of Batley and Spen deserve
more, and the sooner the Conservatives admit that they have sadly
failed our towns and villages, and make way for a Labour
Government who understand the needs of our communities, the
better.
Mr Deputy Speaker ( )
Could those who took part in the debate make their way to the
Chamber now for the wind-ups, which will start seven minutes
after Mr Hunt starts speaking?
4.04pm
(Ipswich) (Con)
The town centre has become one of the dominant issues in Ipswich.
When I talk to constituents, it comes up perhaps more than any
other issue, particularly over the past year or two. In the time
that I have been the MP, there have been a few tragic cases. A
few months after I was elected, my constituent Richard Day was
killed on St Matthew’s Street. Early this year, a teenager was
killed in a knife attack in broad daylight on Westgate Street.
That had a chilling effect throughout the town. Just a few days
ago, at the Clapgate Lane Conservative Club, an attacker held a
knife to the throat of one of my constituents. I have written to
those at the club and will be visiting it soon to discuss how
they are recovering from that incident, which was very
chilling.
The thing about the town centre is that some of the most
inspiring people I have met in Ipswich have been in town centre
businesses. Just this Monday, before travelling to Parliament, I
visited Miss Quirky Kicks, which has relocated in Ipswich and has
a new café-bar—if anybody in Ipswich is listening and wants to
go, I suggest that they do. There is also Geek Retreat Ipswich,
which of course is part of a national franchise but is actually
pretty decentralised. Geek Retreat Ipswich does fantastic work.
It had its two-year anniversary recently. Its work to support
neurodiverse individuals in particular should be commended.
As the Member of Parliament for an area that has a great history
and a town centre with inspirational businesses, but which faces
challenges, it is sometimes difficult to get the balance right
between representing the concerns of my constituents and not
talking the town down. That is a difficult balancing act, and
although I do my best to get it right, some people might think
that I do not always get it right. I cannot pretend that things
are a bed of roses, because I think my constituents would look at
me and wonder if I was on something, so I have to speak frankly
and directly about the challenges as I see them.
When I knock on doors at the moment, I hear the reality that a
lot of Ipswich residents who have lived in the town their whole
lives are shunning their own town centre; they are going to Bury
St Edmunds, Woodbridge and other areas. That is a problem, and
there are many reasons for it. Some of the things that affect our
town centre affect town and city centres up and down the country,
and they are not easy to tackle: the growth of online retail;
empty units; business rates, which need further reform; and, of
course, the Labour council’s car-parking charge, which, according
to my recent survey, 76% of people think are too high—I am just
dropping that one in there.
Safety and crime is probably the No. 1 issue. The reality is that
large numbers of my constituents do not go into the town centre
because they do not feel safe and secure doing so. On that point,
we have had shared prosperity funding to increase the number of
PCSOs in the town centre during daylight hours, we have had safer
streets funding and, of course, we have had our share of the
20,000 police officer uplift, so we have more bobbies on the beat
in the town centre. In the Suffolk constabulary, I deal perhaps
the most with Superintendent Martin. I have a huge amount of time
and respect for what the constabulary does—it will always have my
backing.
What people are saying in their responses to my survey is clear.
I personally enter all the survey responses myself. So far, I
have entered almost 1,000 responses. It is a bit of a weird
thing, but I like to feel the responses, and I can only do so if
I enter them myself—it is very strange and is making my flat look
a bit of a bomb site at the moment, with envelopes and surveys
everywhere. But anyway, the nuts and bolts of the issue are that,
when asked, “Do you support a zero-tolerance approach to
antisocial behaviour?”, 91% of responding constituents agreed.
When it comes to the groups of large men we see—the groups of
large men congregating and acting in a very antisocial way in the
town centre, who are not dispersed by or engaged with by the
police as directly as I would like—some 88% of those who
responded to my survey said that they think those groups should
be dispersed. Shoplifting is also a problem in the town, and 91%
of respondents agreed that there should be tougher punishments
for shoplifting, while only 3% disagreed.
The survey asked people which two of seven things would make the
biggest difference towards getting them back into the town
centre, and No. 1 of the seven was the police adopting a tougher,
zero-tolerance approach to antisocial behaviour, so although I
have a huge amount of respect for our police, we need more of
them in the town centre. In addition, we need them to adopt a
more robust attitude to dealing with the individuals in the town
centre who are blighting the experience for the majority of my
constituents and undermining a beautiful town and its historic
centre. If people are not going into the town centre because of
the behaviour of a small minority, that is a real problem.
On the shoplifting point, we do need to have the deterrent there.
There is a challenge here, however, because some of those
engaging in shoplifting are younger. One of the businesses I
spoke to earlier this week said that those engaged in shoplifting
are 16 and 17-year-olds, so it can be more challenging to deal
with them.
In conclusion, based on my survey responses, when it comes to
town centre safety, we need to boost the police presence in the
town centre, adopt a zero-tolerance attitude and crack down
incredibly hard on the rogue minority who are blighting the
experience of the majority. We need to disperse the groups of
large men who are hanging around and put in place much tougher
punishments for those who engage in shoplifting. We have a great
town in Ipswich—I am very proud to represent it—but the reality
of the situation is that thousands of my constituents are
shunning their own town centre because they do not feel safe.
That is not me talking down the town; it is me seeking to
represent my constituents. I am not going to stand here and
pretend that everything is wonderful. Yes, I welcome the uplift
and the shared prosperity funding, but we need action. We need to
turn the situation around, and I will continue to work with the
Minister—for whom I have quite a lot of time—to try to get robust
action for my constituents.
Mr Deputy Speaker ( )
I call the shadow Minister to start the wind-ups.4.10pm
(Pontypridd) (Lab)
It is a privilege to close this important and timely debate on
behalf of the Opposition, and to follow the hon. Member for
Ipswich (), who gave us a fresh dose of
reality. I welcome his candour in outlining the actual situation
that is faced by so many of our town centres up and down the
country.
Many hon. Members from across the House referenced issues with
their own town centres, particularly knife crime. The hon. Member
for Ipswich, the right hon. Member for Bournemouth East (Mr
Ellwood) and my hon. Friend the Member for Halifax () all talked about the rise in
serious violent crimes in our town centres. Sadly, our police are
having to deal with those crimes more and more. I take this
opportunity to pay tribute to my hon. Friend for all her work on
the Protect the Protectors campaign: she has been a vocal
champion for looking after those who run towards danger when we
all run away from it. It is absolutely imperative that we do more
to protect not only our protectors—our first responders—but our
shop workers and all those who are in our town centres, working
hard to improve those town centres, boost our local economy, and
make our towns better places to live and to enjoy retail and
leisure activities. Sadly, because of the situation that has been
described today, those people face significant challenges.
From the contributions of colleagues from across the House, it is
clear that safety in our town centres is a growing concern for
all of us and for our constituents. My hon. Friends the Member
for Oldham West and Royton (), for Newcastle upon Tyne
North (), for Luton South
() and for Tamworth () all referenced the
challenges faced by the businesses on our local high streets.
They are not only having to deal with bank closures up and down
those high streets, as well as pub closures, rising business
rates and a cost of living crisis, but with a spate of retail
crime that is yet another hammer blow.
My hon. Friends for Luton South and for Tamworth also mentioned
assaults on shop workers, which has been a key focus of this
afternoon’s debate. Our retail workers go out to work not to be
assaulted, to be verbally abused, or to have to protect their
stock from shoplifting; they just want to earn a decent wage to
take home to their family. Sadly, far too many of them are being
put in harm’s way and are not receiving the adequate protections
that they deserve.
My hon. Friends the Members for Mid Bedfordshire () and for Batley and
Spen (), as well as the hon.
Member for Ipswich, also outlined the harsh reality that so many
of us in the UK face. Our town centres are the lifeblood of our
communities; they are a valuable resource that nobody should take
for granted, but far too often, they have been. People do not
feel safe—that is the reality for many people in our country.
They do not feel safe walking up and down their high streets or
their residential streets, and the reality of exactly why that is
has been laid bare before us all. Labour has a plan, but the
Conservatives have failed to deliver any meaningful change for
the past 13 years.
Later in my speech, I will outline exactly what the situation is,
but I will first comment on the contributions made by my good and
hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Yardley (). As always, she is a very
vocal champion; she reminded us all not to be bystanders. Just
last week I attended really important bystander training
organised by the Suzy Lamplugh Trust. I implore all right hon.
and hon. Members across the House to take part in that training.
There was an interesting exchange between my hon. Friend and the
right hon. Member for Bournemouth East about exactly what society
should do—how can we intervene? How can people feel empowered to
do more?
Sadly, I think we have been far too desensitised, and this has
become the norm. It is a sad indictment of the situation that
people feel like this is just part and parcel of everyday life,
but it should not be and it does not have to be. People can all
do more, and they can all be active bystanders if they have had
the appropriate training. If they feel it is safe, they can do
more and can feel empowered to do more.
Mr Ellwood
I want to link this point to what my right hon. and learned
Friend the Member for Northampton North (Sir ) said. We all need to do
intervene more when we see some of the terrible behaviour
prompted by what is happening in the middle east, and to call it
out. I hope the hon. Member would agree with that.
I wholeheartedly agree, and I was going to come on to the very
powerful speech by the right hon. and learned Member for
Northampton North (Sir ), outlining exactly the
situation that faces us all. Everyone in our country should feel
safe in their high streets, their communities and their homes,
regardless of their colour, their religion or their background. I
join him in paying tribute to the CST and Tell MAMA for raising
awareness of the situation. Sadly, it has worsened as a result of
the horrendous attacks in Israel on 7 October, but everyone
should feel safe. I hope that this House has a greater
opportunity to debate that as time goes on.
As we have heard, the Government have ignored challenges ranging
from antisocial behaviour on our streets to retail crime and
violence against shop workers for far too long, and ordinary
people are paying the price. By contrast, as I have said, Labour
has made bold commitments because we recognise that people
deserve to be safe in their communities. In government, we will
halve serious and violent crime and raise confidence in the
police and the criminal justice system within a decade.
Let us be clear: the challenge ahead of us, as we have heard, is
significant. Thanks to this Tory Government’s shameful record, we
are now seeing record instances—up by more than 30%—of criminal
damage to shops, schools, leisure centres and businesses in our
town centres. In the year ending September 2021, 41,500 offences
of criminal damage to a building other than a dwelling were
recorded by the police, yet the latest figures show that this has
risen to almost 55,000, which is about 150 incidents every single
day. How can this be allowed to continue?
The reality of the situation is that the Conservatives have
failed to tackle the root causes of crime and violence. Over the
last 13 years, the role of crime prevention work has been heavily
downgraded by the Home Office, and leadership has been
practically abandoned overnight. Rather than keeping people safe
here in the UK, we have a Government who are more focused on
wasting taxpayers’ money and chasing headlines for their failing
asylum scheme. The Tories are simply out of touch.
Mr French
On crime prevention, one of the best tools used in London is stop
and search, which removes about 400 knives and weapons from
London’s streets each month on average. Can the hon. Lady outline
what the Labour party’s official position is on stop and
search?
I welcome the intervention, and I know that stop and search has
an appropriate place, particularly in targeting knife crime and
offensive weapons. It can be an appropriate tool if used
appropriately, with the police obviously having the appropriate
training and support to do so. It cannot be a blanket policy to
target everybody in our town centres; it has to be used
appropriately, proportionately and effectively if it is to be
used at all. It can be used as an appropriate tool and I
recognise that it has a place, but there are other schemes and,
as I have said, crime prevention has been overlooked far too much
by this Government. There are many schemes to deal with that, and
I will be outlining our plan.
I will welcome an intervention by the Minister if he wants to
reach out to me, but I offer him an olive branch. I invite him to
come and spend the day with me in Pontypridd, because I am
confident that it will take him all of 10 minutes to understand
the real issues that we are discussing.
The Minister for Crime, Policing and Fire ()
And in Croydon South?
Yes, happily.
In fact, my community, along with many others across the country,
recently came together to commemorate White Ribbon Day, which is
always a poignant moment to reflect on the huge battle we
continue to face as we seek to end male violence against women
and girls for good. One of the most shameful consequences of the
last 13 years is the systemic failure to tackle violence against
women and girls, which is having serious consequences. I rarely
have to state the obvious, but sometimes clarity is overlooked in
this place. I genuinely do not know whether men can truly
understand the fear and the constant, often underlying concern
that women feel when out on our streets and in our town centres.
Our safety is not always at the forefront of our minds, but let
it be known that it is always present in them. I know that women,
across ages and across the political divide, know that feeling of
asking a friend to take a longer and safer route home or to
message when they are back. We have all become used to exhibiting
such behaviour as second nature, but how on earth have we got to
a point where women and girls cannot reliably feel safe when
simply walking through our town centres?
Something commonly overlooked is the huge impact that the
situation is having on older people, who may be equally
vulnerable and the targets of crime. I have heard from a number
of older residents—male and female—in my own area, who no longer
feel safe visiting Pontypridd on market day. What used to be a
bustling day for local businesses on the high street is now often
a busy day for my local police force, who are having to do more
and more with less and less. That is the simple reality of the
situation: this Tory Government have sat by and made cuts to
policing that are having a huge impact. Visible policing on our
streets remains at record lows, and often police officers have to
travel across county lines, which means the connections and
knowledge of a local area are sadly lost.
I am lucky in south Wales to have the support of a fantastic,
hardworking and award-winning set of police community support
officers covering our town centre, including Constable Liam
Noyce, Hannah Lowe, Christopher Jones, Lisa Banfield, and Shanie
Ross. Sadly, I know that many other areas are not as fortunate.
The Government’s lack of leadership means that they have failed
to ensure that professional standards in policing are high
enough. Recent events and appalling evidence of misconduct have
also shown us the extent to which trust in policing can be
shattered, and without that trust, policing by consent sadly
becomes impossible.
Patterns of crime and vulnerability are changing, but neither the
police nor the criminal justice system has kept up. Labour can,
and will, do better. As a priority, a Labour Government will
crack down on serious violent crime by preventing young people
from getting drawn into crime and criminal gangs in the first
place. We recognise that there are series issues with knife
crime, which is destroying young lives, devastating families and
undermining our communities.
To tackle that we need a serious programme of police reform and
crime prevention. Government Departments must work together, and
work with the Home Office, to intervene where young people are at
risk and act quickly when knife crime incidents are recorded. At
the moment police forces and local authorities are lacking in
direction, but a Labour Government will take action at the
root.
Whether that is by tackling websites that promote and sell
machetes and dangerous knives, or taking action to stop
vulnerable young people being drawn into crime and gangs by
putting access to mental health support workers into every
school, it is the Labour party that takes safety seriously.
It is utterly wrong that this Government have abandoned their
basic duty to keep people safe on our streets and online. The
numbers speak for themselves. Most of all, after 13 years of Tory
Government, more than 90% of crimes are going unsolved. That
means that criminals are less than half as likely to be caught
now than when Labour was last in government. The Conservatives’
legacy on crime and justice is one of damaging decline and
collapsing confidence, and victims and communities are paying the
price. I echo the pleas of my hon. Friend the Member for
Nottingham North (), who asked the Minister to do
better. If he cannot commit to getting the basics right on
personal safety, people across the country will sadly continue to
suffer. Only Labour has a solid plan for change, and never, ever,
has the need been stronger.
4.22pm
The Minister for Crime, Policing and Fire ()
I thank both shadow Ministers for the opportunity to debate this
important topic, and it is a particular pleasure to follow the
hon. Member for Pontypridd (). We worked together
when we were both on the Culture, Media and Sport Front Benches.
I am not sure whether she is following me or vice-versa, but it
is a pleasure to continue to work with her.
I agree that the retail community, which serves this country so
well, is the lifeblood of our town centres, and it breathes life
into the heart of our communities. My very first job was working
in a shop, in Sainsbury’s in south London, not far from my
current constituency. I was stacking shelves among other things,
so I have had direct experience of working on the frontline of
retail, as I am sure other hon. Members have had as well.
Before I talk a little about shoplifting and antisocial
behaviour—as a number of Members from across the House have said,
more needs to be done there—I want to talk about the facts on
crime and policing as a whole. We have heard many Opposition
Members trying to paint a sort of dystopian, almost Dickensian
picture as part of their pre-election campaigning—they have
referred repeatedly to an election, and make no bones about it:
this is a piece of electioneering. Their dystopian anecdotes do
not bear scrutiny when measured against the facts. We owe it to
this House and the public to be clear about the facts.
Let me start with the crime statistics. The Office for National
Statistics says that the only reliable source of crime data is
the crime survey of England and Wales. In the past year, all
crime as measured by the crime survey has fallen by 10%. Since
2010, when this Government came into office, crime has fallen by
56% on a like-for-like basis, meaning that crime under the last
Labour Government was around double the level it is today.
Looking at some of the more serious crime types individually,
here are the falls we have seen since 2010: criminal damage is
down by 73%, domestic burglary is down by 47%, theft from the
person is down by 44%, vehicle theft is down by 39%, violence is
down by 52% and total theft is down by 47%. Those are the facts,
those are the figures and they are published by the independent
Office for National Statistics. [Interruption.] The figures for
the last year include fraud and are down by 10%.
Let me talk for a moment about police numbers. Some Opposition
Members referred to the reduction in police numbers that occurred
in the years following 2010, before I was even a Member of
Parliament. Let us remember why there was financial pressure in
those years. That was because, as the right hon. Member for
Birmingham, Hodge Hill (), the former Chief Secretary to
the Treasury, helpfully said, there was no money left. The
economic devastation left by the last Labour Government led to
difficult choices. In the past three years, we have hired 21,000
more police officers.
rose—
I will give way in a moment. We now have 149,556 police officers
employed in England and Wales. That is more than we have ever had
at any time in this country’s history, including 2010. Labour has
chosen to look today at neighbourhood policing, which is a subset
of local policing. When we look at all local policing, which
includes several different subcategories, the number has gone up
from 61,000 to 67,000. That includes a number of categories, not
just neighbourhood and response.
rose—
I will give way first to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley
(), and then to my hon.
Friend.
I just wonder, as the Minister is doing such enthusiastic
cheerleading for his Government, whether he could remind me who
the biggest cheerleader was for the mini-Budget.
I am not sure what that has to do with the devastation that the
last Labour Government wreaked on the economy, with the biggest
recession for a generation and unemployment at twice the level it
is today. I am surprised that the hon. Member wants to talk about
the last Labour Government’s appalling economic record.
Let me return to crime and policing, or you will tick me off for
being out of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. I acknowledged a moment
ago that there are some areas where we need to do better, and
shoplifting and antisocial behaviour are two of those, as Members
on both sides of the House have said.
Let me start with shoplifting. Across the western world,
including in the US, Germany and France, in the past year or two
we have seen a considerable increase in shoplifting, and the same
has happened in the United Kingdom. While the 29% increase in
prosecutions for shoplifting in the past year is welcome, we
clearly need to do more. That is why the Government set out a
retail crime action plan to do more in this area, as my hon.
Friend the Member for Gedling () said in his excellent speech.
That was published just a few weeks ago. It includes a commitment
by the police to attend shoplifting incidents where that is
necessary to secure evidence, where there has been an assault, or
where a suspect has been detained, for example, by store security
staff.
It is not acceptable, frankly, that the Co-op has discovered that
in about three quarters of cases where its staff have detained an
offender, the police did not attend. I have said directly to the
police that that is not acceptable, and they have responded with
the commitment they have made in the recent action plan. I expect
better, and the police have committed to delivering better.
rose—
I promised to give way to my hon. Friend the Member for Gedling,
but I will then give way to the hon. Member.
I am old enough to remember the last Labour Government. They went
into the 2010 election promising a £1 billion cut to the Home
Office budget, which I am sure would have had an effect on police
numbers. Whether it was the coalition Government cleaning up
Labour’s mess or the Labour Government cleaning up their own
mess, someone would have had to make the difficult financial
decisions in 2010 that my right hon. Friend the Minister
outlined.
My hon. Friend has a much better memory than some Opposition
Members.
If we accept that there was nothing the Government could do about
the near quarter of a million cases—the Minister has used the
Co-operative Group’s figure himself—where a police officer did
not turn up when somebody had been apprehended, is he now saying
that, from today, a police officer will turn up to every single
call from a Co-op store?
Chief Constable Amanda Blakeman, who is the National Police
Chiefs’ Council lead on this issue, has committed in the retail
crime action plan, which I urge the hon. Member to read, that
where an offender has been detained, the police will prioritise
attendance. I expect all of us in Parliament, and police and
crime commissioners, to hold the police to account in delivering
that commitment. The police have also committed to identify and
target prolific offenders, and to always follow reasonable lines
of inquiry in relation to all crimes, not just shoplifting. That
includes, for example, always retrieving CCTV or mobile phone
footage and running it through the police national database to
seek a facial recognition match to identify offenders.
The technology has improved enormously, even in the last six to
12 months. The artificial intelligence that drives it means that
images that appear to be blurred or partially obscured, which a
year or two ago could not be matched, now can be matched. Always
running images from Ring doorbells, mobile phone pictures,
dashcam footage and CCTV footage through the police national
database will lead to very many more offenders—shoplifters, but
also others—being caught. I have asked all 43 police forces
across England and Wales to double the use of retrospective
facial recognition in the coming year, to make sure that more
offenders are caught.
Time is pressing, so let me move on to antisocial behaviour,
which a number of Members on both sides of the House rightly
identified as a challenge in town centres. My hon. Friends the
Members for Stoke-on-Trent North () and for Stoke-on-Trent
South () both made, in their very
different ways, powerful speeches on this topic, as did my hon.
Friends the Members for Ipswich () and for Broadland () and others on both sides.
Antisocial behaviour is a scourge. It leaves people feeling
uneasy when they visit their town centres, and I agree with my
hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich that we need a zero-tolerance
approach.
In the last five or six months, we have trialled antisocial
behaviour hotspot patrols in a number of police force areas, and
they have been extremely successful. In the areas where they have
been run—they have been fully funded with extra money, by the
way—they have reduced antisocial behaviour by something like 20%
to 30%. Staffordshire is one of the counties that has been
trialling the patrols, along with Lancashire and Essex. Because
the approach has been so successful, we will roll it out across
the whole country from April next year. It will be fully funded
and that will pay for something like 30,000 hours a year of
hotspot patrolling in each police force area, to address the
issue of people feeling unsafe or uneasy in town centres. My hon.
Friends the Members for Ipswich, for Stoke-on-Trent North and for
Stoke-on-Trent South mentioned that in their excellent speeches.
It is coming soon; in fact, it is coming as soon as April.
I have set out the actions being taken on retail crime and on
ASB, and I have set out the fact that crime is falling and that
we have record police numbers, so let me come to the
electioneering we heard from the Opposition. The hon. Members for
Luton South () and for Newcastle upon
Tyne North () called for an election
in what was an extraordinary display of overconfidence, so let us
have a look at what Labour delivers in government.
The last Labour Government delivered fewer police officers than
we now have. They delivered double the levels of crime that we
now have. In London, where there is a Labour police and crime
commissioner, failed to recruit 1,089
officers, despite being given money by the Government, as my hon.
Friend the Member for Cities of London and Westminster () pointed out. He could have
recruited them—the money was there—but he failed to do so. Knife
crime under has gone up, and he was told off
by the Office for National Statistics for misleading the
public—let us be generous and say that it was unintentional—by
claiming that knife crime had fallen on his watch. In the west
midlands, where there is a Labour police and crime commissioner,
they are looking at closing police stations.
Finally, let us look at the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts
Act 2022. Just a year ago, the Labour party voted against that
Bill. Labour Members voted against increasing the sentences for
people assaulting emergency workers. They voted against making
assaulting a shop worker a statutory aggravating factor. They
voted against measures to clamp down on disruptive protests. They
voted against making whole-life orders for premeditated child
murder mandatory. In fact, in the Bill Committee Labour even
voted against keeping rapists in prison for longer, having
introduced release at the halfway point in 2003.
We have seen Labour’s record in government and its record in
London and the west midlands, and we have seen Labour Members
voting against strong legislative measures. The Government have
delivered record police numbers and falling crime. We have got a
plan on antisocial behaviour and on shoplifting. I commend that
to the House.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House condemns the Government’s failure to tackle town
centre crime; is concerned that shoplifting has reached record
levels, with a 25% rise over the past year and 1,000 offences per
day, while the detection rate for shoplifters has fallen;
believes that immediate action must be taken to stop the
increasing number of unacceptable incidents of violence and abuse
faced by shop workers; notes that the number of neighbourhood
police officers and police community support officers has been
reduced by 10,000 since 2015; and calls on the Government to back
Labour’s community policing guarantee, which includes scrapping
the £200 limit on crown court prosecutions for shoplifting in the
Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, creating a
new specific offence of violence against shop workers, rolling
out town centre policing plans and putting 13,000 extra police
and community support officers back in town centres to crack down
on antisocial behaviour.
|
