Tabled by Baroness Smith of Basildon To ask Her
Majesty’s Government, in the light of concerns raised by the
Chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, what
assessment has been made of the likelihood of increased hate crimes
against non-UK EU nationals...Request free trial
Tabled by
-
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of
concerns raised by the Chairman of the Equality and
Human Rights Commission, what assessment has been made
of the likelihood of increased hate crimes against
non-UK EU nationals living in the UK, following the
publication of the Supreme Court’s decision on Article
50 and the capacity of relevant authorities to deal
with the consequences of any such crimes.
-
My Lords, I beg leave to ask a Question of which I have
given private notice.
-
My Lords, we are working very closely with the police
and community organisations to monitor any changes in
hate crime levels. One of the first things that the
Home Secretary did in July last year was to publish a
comprehensive new hate crime action plan to drive
forward work to tackle hate crime. The Prime Minister
and the Home Secretary have both said on numerous
occasions that there is no place in the UK for hate
crime.
-
My Lords, I am not sure that that fully addresses my
Question. All of us want to maintain good relations with
our EU neighbours as we move forward on Brexit. We do not
want another spike in hate crime, as we saw following the
referendum, or the attacks on judges following the court
decision. This week the Prime Minister said that,
“every stray word and every hyped up media report is
going to make it harder for us to get the right deal for
Britain”.
Did the Foreign Secretary, , not get the memo?
Can the noble Baroness confirm whether the Prime Minister
has conveyed the Government’s concern to those sections
of the media to which she alluded, as we all agree that
such histrionic reports can only damage the interests and
the reputation of the UK?
-
The noble Baroness makes a very valid point in terms of
the spike in hate crimes that we saw last year following
the referendum on our membership of the EU. Some of the
spikes in hate crime that we saw were quite unexpected,
particularly as regards the Polish community. I know that
the Home Secretary is today meeting consular staff from
all the EU embassies. After the referendum last year and
the spike in hate crime, we engaged very quickly with the
ambassadors, and they now have a single point of contact.
The noble Baroness is mouthing “media” to me across the
Dispatch Box and I will get to that. The point she makes
is very important: we all have a duty to behave in a
responsible way. However, it is through society being not
just tolerant but welcoming of the various communities
who live in our country that we will make progress, and
the media are part and parcel of that.
-
My Lords, I congratulate my noble friend on emphasising
how important it is that we all behave in a responsible
way. But can she think of a single precedent of when
Ministers have been asked to answer a hypothetical
Question in connection with a hypothetical outcome? Is it
not extraordinary that it is in order to ask a Question
of this nature?
-
It is hypothetical but I hope I can reassure my noble
friend that the Government are prepared and have learned
the lessons from some of the events we have seen in the
last year. Again, to go back to the noble Baroness’s
Question, some of the language has been quite
inflammatory, both in the media and from some members of
the community following the EU referendum. I think that
both as a society and as a Government, we are prepared,
and we are engaged consistently and constantly with
representatives of the various communities across the
country.
-
My Lords, the latest crime figures show an increase of
about 200 hate crimes a week in 2015-16 compared with the
previous year. There has been a 40% increase in hate
crime since 2013-14. This is not a spike but a trend and
police action is simply addressing the symptoms. What
assessment have the Government made of the causes of
these increases and do they believe, as we do, that the
increase in populism and nationalism is behind these
significant and worrying increases?
-
My Lords, I heard various tales post-referendum about the
various communities—
-
A noble Lord
-
I will get to the point about pre-referendum, because in
fact the numbers of hate crimes reported are now down to
pre-referendum levels. The reasons behind some of the
hate crime were many and varied. The Polish community,
for probably the first time in its history in this
country, experienced in Hammersmith an unprecedented
attack, and the Polish centre in Hammersmith was one of
the first centres to benefit from the community
demonstration project funding. As I say, the reasons that
motivate people to provoke hatred against other people
are many and varied, and it is generally based on certain
characteristics of those people and those communities,
and it has gone down to pre-referendum levels since then.
-
My Lords, on 24 June we were all shocked by the level of
responses of hate demonstrated by the recorded and
reported incidents. I declare an interest in my work as
chair of Kick It Out, where we monitor—and have done for
the last 23 years—hate incidents that are at the lower
level of everyday abuse. There is nothing new about the
level of hatred that exists within our society. We have
to tackle the issue of prejudice, which we are not doing
sufficiently. To blame Brexit as a cause of what we saw
on 24 June and since is delusional. Quite frankly, in the
context of racial abuse, you cannot blame the levels of
homophobic abuse and abuse of disabled people that we are
witnessing specifically on Brexit. How are we taking
action to effectively tackle prejudice, which is what
feeds bigotry and hatred?
-
The noble Lord raises a very important point, which is
that it was not Brexit per se that was the cause of this
hatred but Brexit was used as an occasion to promote
prejudice and hatred. The Government have done many
things since 2010 to try to tackle this. I mentioned the
hate crime action plan that the Home Secretary produced
upon becoming Home Secretary. We have made changes to
legislation that offer further protection for transgender
and disabled people, and those have led to the first
convictions for the offence of stirring up hatred on
grounds of sexual orientation. We have also improved the
police recording of hate crime. Forces now capture data
on all five of the monitored hate crime strands. We have
also recently launched a funding scheme to help protect
places of worship from hate crime and to tackle hate
crime at a local level.
-
My Lords, does the Minister agree that drawing the line
between hate crime and the protection of free speech is
one of the most difficult jobs that the police service
has to do? In the event of difficulties following this
judgment, will she ask the Home Secretary to support
police action, perhaps slightly more quickly than the
Lord Chancellor did on the last occasion?
-
I agree with the noble Lord that there is a distinction.
How the police operate is of course up to the police, but
we certainly support them.
-
Is the Minister satisfied with the level of punishment of
perpetrators of hate crime and with the provision for
education of such people? Is it not clear that, unless
and until those guilty of hate crime are taught a lesson
in both senses of the term, they are likely to continue
with their poisonous attitude?
-
I am satisfied with the level of punishment. The noble
Lord raises a point that was mentioned in previous
Questions today—that is, education. We engage the Anne
Frank Trust in going into schools, which is an incredibly
important initiative. It is essential not to forget what
happened in the past. We always say that it will never
happen again but it does, and for children to have at the
forefront of their minds man’s inhumanity to man in the
past helps us in the future.
|