Prison Media Bill

Committee stage
Wednesday 22nd May 2024 Public Bill Committees

The Committee consisted of the following Members:

Chair: Sir Robert Syms

Amesbury, Mike (Weaver Vale) (Lab)

† Argar, Edward (Minister of State, Ministry of Justice)

Bailey, Shaun (West Bromwich West) (Con)

Carmichael, Mr Alistair (Orkney and Shetland) (LD)

† Carter, Andy (Warrington South) (Con)

Cummins, Judith (Bradford South) (Lab)

Davies-Jones, Alex (Pontypridd) (Lab)

† Doyle-Price, Dame Jackie (Thurrock) (Con)

† Fletcher, Katherine (South Ribble) (Con)

Hobhouse, Wera (Bath) (LD)

Hollern, Kate (Blackburn) (Lab)

Hopkins, Rachel (Luton South) (Lab)

† Howell, Paul (Sedgefield) (Con)

† Kniveton, Kate (Burton) (Con)

† Mumby-Croft, Holly (Scunthorpe) (Con)

Sambrook, Gary (Birmingham, Northfield) (Con)

† Simmonds, David (Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner) (Con)

Liam Laurence Smith, Committee Clerk

† attended the Committee

Public Bill Committee

Wednesday 22 May 2024

[Sir Robert Syms in the Chair]

Prison Media Bill

10:00

[The Chair]

Before we begin, I have a few preliminary reminders for the Committee. Please switch electronic devices to silent. No food or drink is permitted during sittings of the Committee, except for the water provided. Hansard colleagues would be grateful if Members could email their speaking notes to [e-mail]. My selection and grouping for today’s sitting is available online and in the room. There will be a single debate on all clauses and amendments.

Clause 1

Unauthorised photograph or sound-recording of the inside of a prison

[Katherine Fletcher (South Ribble) (Con)]

I beg to move amendment 1, in clause 1, page 1, line 4, leave out from “(1),” to end of line 7 and insert “for the “or” at the end of paragraph (a) substitute—

“(aa) takes a photograph of the inside of a prison from outside the prison, or””.

This amendment modifies the amendments to section 40D of the Prison Act 1952 made by clause 1 so they no longer make it an offence to make a sound-recording of the inside of a prison from the outside of a prison (but they still make it an offence to take a photograph of the inside of a prison from the outside of a prison).

[The Chair]

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:

Amendment 2.

Clause 1 stand part. 

Amendments 3 to 10. 

Clause 2 stand part.

Amendments 11 to 19. 

Clause 3 stand part. 

New clause 1—Unauthorised photographs, films and sound recordings of prisons and prison workers: Scotland.

New clause 2—Unauthorised photograph or sound-recording of the inside of a prison: Northern Ireland.

New clause 3—Unauthorised photographs and sound-recordings of prisons and prison workers: Northern Ireland.

[Katherine Fletcher]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Robert, for the very first time and to propose legislation to the House. Let’s get to it.

The Prison Media Bill tackles the serious, real-world harm caused by photos, videos and other media created of the inside of prisons and of prison staff and uploaded to social media and websites. We have seen that content used to intimidate and harass victims of crime, prison workers and their families, causing significant distress, and to facilitate continued criminality in both prisons and the community, including drug supply, violence and gang feuds. Given the severe consequences for the safety and wellbeing of victims of crime and prison staff, it is unacceptable that such prison content should be allowed to remain online.

This important Bill will strengthen section 40D of the Prison Act 1952 to ensure the removal of such photos and videos from online platforms and to reduce their harms. It will also discourage individuals from making and uploading the content in the first place, updating legislation passed in the 1950s—very much in the absence of modern social media. The Bill will achieve that by closing existing loopholes, making the uploading of unauthorised prison content illegal regardless of whether it has been uploaded from the prison or the community. It will also make it clear beyond doubt that it is illegal to film the inside of a prison from the outside, for example by drone. Importantly, it will also make it illegal to film staff on prison land.

I am grateful for the service of the prison officers who work in the two prisons in the South Ribble constituency, HMP Garth and HMP Wymott. They do a caring and brave job, day after day. The important measures in the Bill will protect their right not to be intimidated or harassed while going to work and will stop that activity, especially where it facilitates continued criminality. Together, those changes will provide social media companies with the clarity they need that such content has been unlawfully uploaded and must therefore be removed.

With that background in mind, I turn to the clauses in the Bill, as well as the amendments and new clause 1.

[Andy Carter (Warrington South) (Con)]

Before my hon. Friend goes into the detail, she mentioned section 40D of the Prison Act 1952, which already contains provisions to prohibit mobile phones from being allowed inside prisons. Perhaps we should make it clear that it is already illegal to have a mobile phone there. Am I right in understanding that the Bill will mean that anybody who is on prison grounds or grounds surrounding a prison who films is also committing a criminal act and can be sentenced in a magistrates court or Crown court?

[Katherine Fletcher]

As usual, and as his service as a magistrate shows, my hon. Friend is quite right. It is illegal to have a mobile phone in a prison estate at the moment, and it is potentially punishable with an additional two years of sentence. The Bill strikes the right balance between preventing criminality, in terms of filming prison officers and providing protections, which I will turn to, for people who happen to live close to a prison, such as those in Ulnes Walton.

We are aware that, while it is illegal to have a phone in prison—from legislation from the 1950s, prior to the social media age—it does happen occasionally, and there is a worrying increase in media being uploaded outside of the prison estate by members of the community for various nefarious means, which I have set out. The figures in the briefing pack show that there have been about 2,000 such incidents in the last three years, so it is important that we have the legislative powers to prevent it.

[Paul Howell (Sedgefield) (Con)]

In terms of the people affected, my hon. Friend has mentioned the prison officers and people living near the prisons, but there are also people such as the family of my constituent Christie Harnett, who was the victim of knife crime and sadly murdered by a gang. The protagonists are now locked away, but they recently put something out on social media. The distress that that causes to the family is just off the scale. My understanding is that this Bill should help to prevent those sorts of things, which cause distress to families who have already suffered unimaginably.

[Katherine Fletcher]

My hon. Friend—very good friend —is absolutely correct. I thank him for the work he does on behalf of his constituents day in, day out. Sedgefield, I dare say, has never had a better Member of Parliament, or certainly not a more community-engaged one.

My hon. Friend is quite right, and that is exactly why we are bringing forward these measures: to make sure that the victims of crime and their families do not see content made with nefarious intentions coming out of prisons and—I will come to this—to make it absolutely clear to social media companies that this stuff is illegal and that, as part of their terms of service, their teams can get it taken down.

May I also pass my regards to my hon. Friend’s constituent’s family? It does sound like a difficult time, and I hope that they can see that we are taking action to prevent such distress in future.

Let me turn to clause 1—unauthorised photograph or sound-recording of the inside of a prison—and amendments 1 and 2. The clause makes minor modifications to the wording of section 40D of the Prison Act 1952 to put beyond doubt the illegality of creating unauthorised media of the inside of a prison from the outside, including via drones. As drafted, the Prison Act 1952 could be interpreted as not applying to media created by drones from above prisons. Such videos quite clearly present a security risk, showing both the lay-out of the prison buildings in detail and staff and prisoner movements, and could facilitate criminals in smuggling in drugs or weapons, or even in planning or facilitating an escape.

To ensure consistency between fines for offences under the existing and new wording, clause 1 also removes the statutory minimum limit for fines on summary conviction—fines are an important point that we will return to later. That change ensures that these offences, as previously, can be punished by a fine of any amount, as well as a prison sentence of up to two years, to reflect the seriousness of recording this content and the harm that it poses.

Ahead of today’s sitting, I tabled two amendments to clause 1 to avoid criminalising behaviour that it is not necessary or appropriate to criminalise, and to ensure consistency within the existing offences. Amendment 1 will exclude sound recordings from the offence in section 40D(1) of the 1952 Act of creating and uploading content of the inside of a prison from the outside. This change is important to avoid criminalising people who live close to a prison capturing sounds from the prison that can be overheard from their properties.

For example, my community of Ulnes Walton is adjacent to HMP Garth and HMP Wymott. We cannot criminalise people videoing a fun family event—perhaps a barbecue in the garden—who happen to record sounds from the prison. This is an important protection, as it would not be appropriate to include that type of situation in the offence. Such sound recordings do not present the same security risks as videos and photographs taken of the inside of a prison from the outside.

Amendment 2 specifies that a sound recording made of sounds transmitted from inside the prison, or a photograph taken of images transmitted from inside the prison, will be treated as one made or taken inside the prison. This will ensure that the recording of a prison audio or video call made by individuals receiving them on the outside will still be an offence under section 40D(1)(a) of the 1952 Act. These recordings can cause harm by being used to threaten or harass victims or people in the community.

Amendment 2 will also provide a defence for someone to show that they did not know, and had no reasonable cause to believe, that a photograph or video taken from outside a prison was of the inside of a prison. The purpose of amendment 2 is to avoid criminalising people who unintentionally create or upload photographs or videos of the inside of a prison taken from the outside. Real-world examples could be dashcam footage from a car driving past the Ulnes Walton road that inadvertently captures the inside of an open prison or a person taking a photo from a plane and inadvertently capturing the inside of a prison from above. We do not want to criminalise non-problematic behaviour. Like amendment 1, amendment 2 will make the scope of the new offences narrower and ensure that legitimate behaviour outside the policy intention of the offences is not unintentionally criminalised.

I turn now to clause 2 and amendments 3 to 10, which relate to unauthorised photographs and sound recordings of prisons and prison workers. Clause 2 will introduce a new offence of creating unauthorised media of prison workers on prison land. This is intended to crack down on so-called audit videos and the threats they pose to prison staff and security. The threat of targeting and harassment is present for everyone working in prisons, so clause 2 will apply to recordings of prison officers, custody officers in private prisons, legal visitors, inspectors, delivery drivers, building contractors, providers of healthcare and education and, importantly, volunteers, who do fantastic work in our communities and who I want to personally thank on the record.

Clause 2 defines prison land as any area connected with the provision, running or management of a prison. That includes land immediately surrounding the prison walls and land used for car parking, storage or accommodating staff. The clause also specifies that the new offence of creating unauthorised media of prison workers on prison land must be intentional. This would exclude instances of filming from a property near to a prison or filming the exterior of a prison and unintentionally capturing media of prison workers.

Clause 2 will make the unauthorised uploading of photos or videos from inside of a prison, or of prison workers on prison land, an offence, regardless of whether the media was uploaded from—this is the crucial bit—within the prison or within the community. This will close the loophole whereby it is not currently an offence for someone outside a prison to upload media they have been sent by someone in prison that was created unlawfully. This measure is designed to provide social media companies with helpful clarity about this content being illegally uploaded, and they will be required to remove it under their terms of service.

[Paul Howell]

Just before I get to the point of my intervention, I have made an awful error and would like to correct the record. I came into this Bill Committee thinking about Christie Harnett, a girl who died from suicide because of the Tees Valley mental health trust problems. I inadvertently used her name, when the constituent I actually wanted to refer to earlier was Jack Woodley and his mother Zoey McGill.

To the point of my intervention, will these measures clarify for people—such as those at the Northern Echo, who are running a great campaign against knife crime, which is the cause of this issue—what they can and cannot put into the media, while still enabling them to get at those committing knife crime?

[Katherine Fletcher]

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. I think that his needing to correct the record due to his campaigning for multiple constituents shows the type of MP he is, and I am sure Hansard will be able to make that correction.

To my hon. Friend’s point, yes, if any media outlet is inadvertently amplifying videos that have been created illegally within the prison estate, the Bill will make it very clear to them that that is not legal, and His Majesty’s Prison Service will have the opportunity to intervene—although I hope that they will hear about the Bill being passed and self-police in that area. All major social media companies state in their terms of service that their platforms cannot be used for illegal or unlawful purposes.

Clause 2 also includes a defence for someone uploading content that they did not know, or had no reasonable cause to believe, was filmed or created illegally. This could include reasonably believing content to be a fictitious depiction of prisons or prison workers on a film set or from a historic, decommissioned prison. Both those new offences will be punishable solely by a fine for individuals creating and uploading media. In line with existing fines, that fine would be unlimited. That reflects the difference in severity between the offence of creating or uploading content from outside a prison and the offence of doing so from inside a prison, where possessing a mobile phone without authorisation is illegal and could be punished by a prison sentence of up to two years.

Clause 2 also provides, for both offences, a defence of reasonable belief that media was created with authorisation. That would include, for example, an honest and reasonable mistake as to whether a prison governor had permitted a news outlet to record interviews with its workers outside the prison.

10:15

The importance of public interest has been carefully considered. The clause contains a public interest defence for both new offences. That could include whistleblowing —an important topic—by members of prison staff or members of the public filming potential misconduct of prison staff from outside a prison.

Amendments 3 to 9 are all consequential on amendment 1, which excludes sound-only recordings, as already discussed. Amendment 10, a small technical amendment to ensure consistency with existing legislation, extends Crown immunity from prosecution for the new offences in sections 40DA and 40DB of the Prison Act to individuals who work at the prison, but are not serving agents of the Crown, in line with the extension for existing offences in section 40D. To put that into a real-world context, the immunity protects a building contractor who needs to take a photo of their work from inside a prison to have it certified, or, perhaps more likely, private prison officers who are not technically Crown employees and use body-worn cameras in the performance of their duties.

Let me turn to clause 3, new clauses 1 to 3, and amendments 11 to 19. I grant that it is unusual to have so many amendments to a private Member’s Bill at this stage, but the reasons will become clear. Clause 3 contains technical provisions for the geographic coverage and coming into force of the Bill. In its current, unamended form, it provides that the Bill will apply to only England and Wales. At this point, it will be helpful to explain the three new clauses and amendment that I have tabled to extend the Bill to Scotland and Northern Ireland, so that the measures to tackle harmful prison media apply UK-wide, which is important.

If extended to Scotland and Northern Ireland, the Bill will benefit citizens across the UK by improving the safety of all prison staff and the security of all prisons in the UK. Victims of crime in Scotland and Northern Ireland, not just England and Wales, will be better protected against the sharing of digital media illegally created by the perpetrators from inside prison. Harmful digital content is not constrained by the borders of the UK. The extension of the Bill’s coverage will curtail the availability of that material.

The Bill can be extended to cover Scotland and Northern Ireland in two ways. First, the UK Parliament can legislate to create the uploading offence, as it falls within the reserved area of internet services. If the measures applied to only England and Wales, they would create a legislative gap affecting how internet services are regulated in Scotland and Northern Ireland in respect of such content. The devolved legislatures would be unable to fill that gap due to the agreement on reserved powers.

While the uploading offences come under the internet services reservation, there are connected offences that fall under the devolved matter of the management of offenders. To avoid criminalising the uploading of content in Scotland and Northern Ireland that is legal to have filmed or created, such as content involving prison workers created from outside a prison, we are seeking to modify Scotland and Northern Ireland’s respective prison legislation. That engages the legislative consent process with those Administrations. Officials in the Ministry of Justice have been working with their counterparts in the Scottish Government and the Northern Ireland Executive, and with the respective prison services, on that approach. I would like put on record how grateful I am for the constructive cross-party working from officials from all three Administrations. I thank them for the opportunity to extend this measure UK-wide.

New clause 1 amends the Prisons (Scotland) Act 1989 to create equivalent offences of creating and uploading prison content in Scotland. New clauses 2 and 3 amend the Prison Act (Northern Ireland) 1953 to ensure that equivalent provisions will apply in Northern Ireland when the Bill is passed. Amendments 11 to 17 and 19 make provision about the extent and commencement that is consequential on new clauses 1 to 3.

Finally, and separately to the issue of territorial extent, amendment 18 is a small technical amendment to ensure consistency in the Bill’s measures. This change gives the Secretary of State the powers to make different transitional or transitory provisions, or provisions to preserve the operation of existing legislation, for different areas of the country. This creates consistency with the powers that the Secretary of State already has to commence the Bill on different days in different areas of the country, with the areas of the country being the crucial part.

For completeness, clause 3 as drafted sets out, along with other technical specifics, that the Prison Media Act 2024, as it will be known, will be brought into force by regulations made by the Secretary of State. Clause 3 also provides that the Secretary of State can make certain provisions in connection with the Bill’s measures coming into force if necessary. These could be transitional or transitory provisions, or provisions to preserve the operation of existing legislation. Different provisions can be made for different purposes.

I reiterate my thanks to all the officials who have worked incredibly hard on this Bill, and I look forward to it being enacted.

[The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Edward Argar)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Robert. I add my wholehearted support to my hon. Friend the Member for South Ribble for introducing this hugely important Bill. She has handled today’s proceedings and presented her case with aplomb, elegance and eloquence, as though she had done this 100 times already, so I pay tribute to her for that. It has been a pleasure to work with her on this Bill. It is a testament to her determination to get things done that she has brought it this far. Her South Ribble constituents are very lucky to have her.

As the Minister for prisons, parole and probation, it is central to my role to help to protect the public from serious offenders and improve the safety and security of our prisons. The Prison Media Bill will help us to achieve those core priorities by demonstrating a zero-tolerance approach to social media misuse from within custody. Like my hon. Friend, I put on record my gratitude to all those who work in His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service for the work they do day in, day out to keep people safe.

I also put on record my gratitude for the contributions today, including from my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington South. In this place—this is not always the case with all colleagues—on matters of justice, he knows of what he speaks, with his strong track record as a magistrate and in this House, so it is always interesting and instructive to listen to his contributions.

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Sedgefield, who rightly highlighted a very distressing case, which he and I have discussed. He has been diligent and dogged in his pursuit of his constituent’s interests in this matter. As with my hon. Friend the Member for South Ribble, his constituents are equally very lucky to have him.

The Bill strengthens existing legislation, specifically the Prison Act 1952, on the unauthorised creation and uploading of digital media, including photographs and videos created inside prisons, or of the inside of prisons from outside—for example, by drone. Deterring individuals from uploading videos and photographs and removing from social media those that are uploaded is crucial. The content can cause very serious harm. It can be used to harass and cause distress to victims of crime and their families, as my hon. Friend the Member for Sedgefield highlighted, thereby re-traumatising them. It can facilitate continued criminality, which extends beyond prison walls into the community, including drug supply, violence and gang feuds. Videos taken from above prisons by drone can also cause serious security risks.

As well as videos and photos created inside prison, the Bill tackles, as my hon. Friend the Member for South Ribble said, so-called audit style videos, where members of the public film prison staff from outside a prison, threatening the safety of hard-working prison workers. We are not talking about a couple of cases: last year, HMPPS reported 890 pieces of harmful prison content found online, and between 2020 and 2023, it reported nearly 2,000 uploads. The reality is that that probably under-represents the true scale of the problem as those figures are just for reported incidents. That is why, in clause 1, it is hugely important that the statutory maximum limit for fines on summary conviction is effectively removed, aiming to ensure that the offences can be punished by a fine of any amount, reflecting their seriousness.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for South Ribble for working so closely with my officials to amend the Bill to extend it to Scotland and Northern Ireland through new clauses 1 to 3 and amendments 11 to 17 and 19. As initially drafted, the measures would apply only in England and Wales. However, as she highlighted, harmful digital content is not constrained by the borders within our United Kingdom, so extending the Bill’s coverage will better protect victims from distressing content created by their perpetrators inside prison, as well as bolstering prison security and the safety of prison officers across all nations in the UK.

My officials, like my hon. Friend, have worked closely with officials in the Scottish Government and the Northern Ireland Executive to ensure that the provisions that fall within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament and the Northern Ireland Assembly are consistent and compatible with existing devolved offences, and that the Bill’s provisions will function effectively within those jurisdictions. I, too, put on record my gratitude for the co-operation of Ministers and officials in the Scottish Government and the Northern Ireland Executive, particularly for the speed with which they have looked at the matter and given their support in principle to extending the Bill in respect of those devolved offences. Again, I suspect an element of that is testament to the persuasiveness of my hon. Friend.

I am also grateful to my hon. Friend for tabling amendments 1 to 10, intended, first, to avoid criminalising behaviour that is not necessary or appropriate to criminalise; and secondly, to ensure internal consistency between measures in the Bill and external consistency with existing offences. The changes are designed to ensure that the Bill functions effectively and that provisions do not capture legitimate content, as she said, such as recording by neighbouring residents of a prison or someone’s dashcam capturing the inside of an open prison from a car driving past.

[Andy Carter]

The Minister mentioned the 2,000 or so cases, over a couple of years, where material has been posted online. What action has been taken to remove that material? Are social media companies working with His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service to ensure that it is taken down in a timely manner, that prison officers are protected, and in particular that their identities are not disclosed in a way that could cause them danger?

[Edward Argar]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, not least because he gave me the opportunity to have a glass of water. He is right to raise that point. The figures reflect reported incidents, so the number may well be higher. I met social media companies relatively recently to discuss this matter. They are improving in both speed and in taking things down, but one challenge is often that each social media company has its own rules, guidelines and approach to tackling harmful content, so there is not always a consistent policy approach by each one. Some—I will not name them—have engaged constructively, while others are more challenging to work with. However, across all of them, there is a recognition of this, and the Bill will further reinforce the sense of obligation upon them.

In closing, I reiterate my thanks to my hon. Friend the Member for South Ribble for bringing forward this hugely important piece of legislation and confirm the Government’s continuing support for it as amended, subject to the Committee’s decisions. The Bill will enable us to tackle the issue of harmful prison media being uploaded online. It will allow us to disrupt the continued criminality that that fuels. It will reduce distress caused to members of the public, bolster prison security and ensure that prison staff can go to work without fear of online targeting and harassment. I am pleased to support my hon. Friend in that endeavour.

Amendment 1 agreed to.

Amendment made: 2, in clause 1, page 1, line 7, at end insert—

“(2A) After subsection (1) insert—

‘(1A) For the purposes of subsection (1)(a)—

(a) a photograph taken outside a prison of an image which is being transmitted from inside the prison by electronic communications for simultaneous reception outside the prison is to be treated as a photograph taken inside the prison, and

(b) a sound-recording made outside a prison of sounds which are being transmitted by electronic communications from inside the prison for simultaneous reception outside the prison is to be treated as a sound-recording made inside the prison.’

(2B) Omit subsection (2).

(2C) After subsection (4) insert—

‘(4A) In proceedings for an offence under subsection (1)(aa) it is a defence for the accused to show that they did not know and had no reasonable cause to believe that the photograph was of the inside of a prison.’”—(Katherine Fletcher.)

This amendment clarifies that taking a photograph or making a sound-recording of material transmitted from inside a prison is covered by the existing offence in section 40D(1)(a) of the Prison Act 1952. It also provides a defence in relation to the offence in section 40(D(1)(aa) of that Act.

Clause 1, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 2

Unauthorised photographs and sound-recordings of prisons and prison workers

10:30

Amendments made: 3, in clause 2, page 2, line 12, leave out “or sound-recording”.

This amendment and Amendments 4 to 9 are consequential on amendment 1, and mean that new section 40DB of the Prison Act 1952 no longer makes it an offence to upload to an internet service a sound-recording of the inside of a prison made from outside the prison.

Amendment 4, in clause 2, page 2, line 14, leave out “or sound-recording”.

See the explanatory statement for Amendment 3.

Amendment 5, in clause 2, page 2, line 15, leave out “or made”.

See the explanatory statement for Amendment 3.

Amendment 6, in clause 2, page 2, line 17, at end insert—

“(1A) A person is guilty of an offence if—

(a) without authorisation, the person uploads a sound-recording to an internet service, and

(b) the sound-recording—

(i) was made inside a prison, or

(ii) records a prison worker on prison land.

(1B) Subsection (1A) of section 40D (photograph or sound recording of a transmission from a prison) applies for the purposes of subsections (1)(b)(i) and (1A)(b)(i) of this section as it applies for the purposes of subsection (1)(a) of that section.”

See the explanatory statement for Amendment 3.

Amendment 7, in clause 2, page 2, line 22, after “(1)(b)(i)” insert “or (1A)(b)(i)”.

See the explanatory statement for Amendment 3.

Amendment 8, in clause 2, page 2, line 26, leave out “or sound-recording”.

See the explanatory statement for Amendment 3.

Amendment 9, in clause 2, page 2, line 27, after “(1)(b)(iii)” insert “or (1A)(b)(ii)”.

See the explanatory statement for Amendment 3.

Amendment 10, in clause 2, page 3, line 23, at end insert—

“(4) In section 40F(1) (offences under sections 40B to 40D: extension of Crown immunity) for ‘40D’ substitute ‘40DB’.”—(Katherine Fletcher.)

This amendment provides for persons who work at a prison, are not servants or agents of the Crown and have been designated by the Secretary of State to benefit from Crown immunity from the new offences under sections 40DA and 40DB of the Prison Act 1952.

Clause 2, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 3

Extent, commencement and short title

Amendments made: 11, in clause 3, page 3, line 25, leave out subsection (1) and insert—

“(1) Sections 1 and 2 of this Act extend to England and Wales only.

(1A) Section (Unauthorised photographs, films and sound-recordings of prisons and prison workers: Scotland) of this Act extends to Scotland only.

(1B) Sections (Unauthorised photograph or sound-recording of the inside of a prison: Northern Ireland) and (Unauthorised photographs and sound-recordings of prisons and prison workers: Northern Ireland) of this Act extend to Northern Ireland only.

(1C) This section extends to England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.”

This amendment makes provision about extent that is consequential on NC1 to NC3.

Amendment 12, in clause 3, page 3, line 26, leave out

“Sections 1 and 2 of this Act come”

and insert

“Except as provided by subsections (2A), (2B) and (4), this Act comes”.

This amendment and Amendments 13 to 17 make provision about commencement that is consequential on NC1 to NC3.

Amendment 13, in clause 3, page 3, line 27, at end insert—

“(2A) Section (Unauthorised photographs, films and sounds-recordings of prisons and prisons workers: Scotland) so far as it—

(a) inserts sections 41ZC and 41ZD into the Prisons (Scotland) Act 1989, and

(b) inserts sections 41ZF and 41ZG into that Act as those sections apply to section 41ZC or 41ZD of that Act,

comes into force on such day as the Scottish Ministers may by regulations appoint.

(2B) The following provisions come into force on such day as the Department of Justice in Northern Ireland may by order appoint—

(a) section (Unauthorised photograph or sound-recording of the inside of a prison: Northern Ireland);

(b) section (Unauthorised photographs and sound-recordings of prisons and prison workers: Northern Ireland) so far as it—

(i) inserts section 34D into the Prison Act (Northern Ireland) 1953, and

(ii) inserts section 34F into that Act as that section applies to section 34D of that Act.”

See the explanatory statement for Amendment 12.

Amendment 14, in clause 3, page 3, line 28, leave out

“Different days may be appointed”

and insert

“Regulations under subsection (2) or (2A), and orders under subsection (2B), may appoint different days”.

See the explanatory statement for Amendment 12.

Amendment 15, in clause 3, page 3, line 32, at end insert

“, other than a provision mentioned in subsection (2A) or (2B).”

See the explanatory statement for Amendment 12.

Amendment 16, in clause 3, page 3, line 32, at end insert—

“(5A) The Scottish Ministers may by regulations make transitional, transitory or saving provision in connection with the coming into force of the provision mentioned in subsection (2A).

(5B) The Department of Justice in Northern Ireland may by order make transitional, transitory or saving provision in connection with the coming into force of a provision mentioned in subsection (2B).”

See the explanatory statement for Amendment 12.

Amendment 17, in clause 3, page 3, line 33, after “(5)” insert

“, or (5A), and the power to make orders under subsection (5B),”.

See the explanatory statement for Amendment 12.

Amendment 18, in clause 3, page 3, line 34, at end insert “or areas”.

This amendment enables transitional provision in connection with the coming into force of the Bill to make different provision for different areas. This is for consistency with the commencement power in clause 3(3).

Amendment 19, in clause 3, page 3, line 34, at end insert—

“(6A) For regulations made under subsection (2A) or (5A) by the Scottish Ministers, see section 27 of the Interpretation and Legislative Reform (Scotland) Act 2010 (asp 10) (Scottish statutory instruments).

(6B) A power of the Department of Justice in Northern Ireland to make an order under subsection (2B) or (5B) is exercisable by statutory rule for the purposes of the Statutory Rules (Northern Ireland) Order 1979 (S.I. 1979/1573 (N.I. 12)).”—(Katherine Fletcher.)

See the explanatory statement for Amendment 12.

Clause 3, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

New Clause 1

Unauthorised photographs, films and sound recordings of prisons and prison workers: Scotland

After section 41ZB of the Prisons (Scotland) Act 1989 insert—

“41ZC Unauthorised photograph, film or sound recording of a prison

(1) A person commits an offence if, without authorisation—

(a) the person takes a photograph, or makes a film or a sound recording, inside a prison, or

(b) the person takes a photograph, or makes a film, of the inside of a prison from outside the prison.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(a)—

(a) a photograph taken outside a prison of an image which is being transmitted from inside the prison by electronic communications for simultaneous reception outside the prison is to be treated as a photograph taken inside the prison,

(b) a film made outside a prison of an image which is being transmitted from inside the prison by electronic communications for simultaneous reception outside the prison is to be treated as a film made inside the prison, and

(c) a sound recording made outside a prison of sounds which are being transmitted from inside the prison by electronic communications for simultaneous reception outside the prison is to be treated as a sound recording made inside the prison.

(3) In proceedings for an offence under this section it is a defence for the accused person to show that—

(a) the person reasonably believed that the person was acting in circumstances to which an authorisation applied (even though no authorisation did apply), or

(b) in the circumstances there was an overriding public interest which justified the person’s actions.

(4) In proceedings for an offence under subsection (1)(b) it is a defence for the accused person to show that they did not know and had no reasonable cause to believe that the photograph or film was of the inside of a prison.

(5) A person who commits an offence under this section is liable—

(a) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 2 years or to a fine (or to both);

(b) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 12 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or to both).

(6) In this section ‘electronic communications’ has the same meaning as in the Electronic Communications Act 2000 (see section 15(1) of that Act).

41ZD Unauthorised photograph, film or sound recording of a prison worker on prison land

(1) A person commits an offence if—

(a) without authorisation the person takes a photograph, or makes a film or a sound recording, of a prison worker while the prison worker is on prison land, and

(b) the person intends the photograph, film or sound recording to record a prison worker on prison land.

(2) It is immaterial for the purposes of subsection (1) where the recording medium is located.

(3) In proceedings for an offence under this section it is a defence for the accused person to show that—

(a) the person reasonably believed that the person was acting in circumstances to which an authorisation applied (even though no authorisation did apply), or

(b) in the circumstances there was an overriding public interest which justified the person’s actions.

(4) A person who commits an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale.

41ZE Uploading of a photograph, film or sound recording of a prison or prison worker

(1) A person commits an offence if—

(a) without authorisation, the person uploads a photograph or film to an internet service, and

(b) the photograph or film—

(i) was taken or made inside a prison,

(ii) is of the inside of a prison, or

(iii) records a prison worker on prison land.

(2) A person commits an offence if—

(a) without authorisation, the person uploads a sound recording to an internet service, and

(b) the sound recording—

(i) was made inside a prison, or

(ii) records a prison worker on prison land.

(3) Subsection (2) of section 41ZC (photograph, film or sound recording of a transmission from a prison) applies for the purposes of subsections (1)(b)(i) and (2)(b)(i) of this section as it applies for the purposes of subsection (1)(a) of that section.

(4) In proceedings for an offence under this section, it is a defence for the accused person to show that—

(a) the person did not know and had no reasonable cause to believe—

(i) in a case within subsection (1)(b)(i) or (2)(b)(i), that the photograph was taken or the film or sound recording was made inside a prison;

(ii) in a case within subsection (1)(b)(ii), that the photograph or film was of the inside of a prison;

(iii) in a case within subsection (1)(b)(iii) or (2)(b)(ii), that the photograph, film or sound recording recorded a prison worker on prison land,

(b) the person reasonably believed that the person was acting in circumstances to which an authorisation applied (even though no authorisation did apply), or

(c) in the circumstances there was an overriding public interest which justified the person’s actions.

(5) A person who commits an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale.

(6) In this section ‘internet service’ has the meaning given by section 228 of the Online Safety Act 2023.

41ZF Sections 41ZC to 41ZE: meaning of “authorisation” and other interpretation

(1) In sections 41ZC to 41ZE ‘authorisation’ means a written authorisation given for the purposes of the section in question—

(a) in favour of any specified person or person of a specified description,

(b) for a specified purpose, and

(c) by—

(i) the governor or director of a prison in relation to activities at that prison, or

(ii) the Scottish Ministers in relation to activities at any specified prison.

(2) In subsection (1) ‘specified’ means specified in the authorisation.

(3) In sections 41ZC to 41ZE—

‘film’ has the same meaning as in Part 1 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (see section 5B(1) of that Act);

‘photograph’ has the same meaning as in that Part (see section 4(2) of that Act);

‘sound recording’ has the same meaning as in that Part (see section 5A(1) of that Act).

(4) In sections 41ZD and 41ZE ‘prison worker’ means any of the following—

(a) an officer of a prison;

(b) a person certified as a prisoner custody officer under section 114(1) of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 who is authorised to perform custodial duties (within the meaning of section 117(1) of that Act);

(c) any other person who (whether as a servant or agent of the Crown or otherwise)—

(i) works in a prison, or

(ii) visits, or attends at, a prison for the purposes of the person’s work (including voluntary work).

(5) In sections 41ZD and 41ZE ‘prison land’ means—

(a) a prison, or

(b) any land which—

(i) is occupied by a person for a purpose connected with the provision, running or management of a prison, and

(ii) has been declared by the Scottish Ministers to be prison land in a declaration for the purposes of the section in question.

(6) A declaration under subsection (5)(b)(ii) must be made in writing and published in such manner as the Scottish Ministers consider appropriate.

41ZG Offences under sections 41ZC to 41ZE: extension of Crown immunity

(1) An individual who—

(a) works at a prison,

(b) does not do that work as a servant or agent of the Crown, and

(c) has been designated by the Scottish Ministers for the purposes of this section,

is to be treated for the purposes of the application of sections 41ZC to 41ZE as if the individual were doing that work as a servant or agent of the Crown.

(2) A designation for the purposes of this section may be given—

(a) in relation to persons specified in the designation or persons of a description so specified, and

(b) in relation to all work falling within subsection (1)(a) or only in relation to such activities as the designation may provide.”—(Katherine Fletcher.)

This new clause amends the Prisons (Scotland) Act 1989 to create new offences of taking a photograph, or making a film or a sound-recording, inside a prison; of taking a photograph, or making a film, of the inside of a prison; of taking a photograph, or making a film or a sound-recording, of a prison worker on prison land; and of uploading content relating to prisons to an internet service.

Brought up, and read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill.

New Clause 2

Unauthorised photograph or sound-recording of the inside of a prison: Northern Ireland

(1) Section 34C of the Prison Act (Northern Ireland) 1953 (offences relating to prison security) is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (1), for the ‘or’ at the end of paragraph (a) substitute—

‘(aa) takes a photograph of the inside of a prison from outside the prison, or’.

(3) After subsection (1) insert—

‘(1A) For the purposes of subsection (1)(a)—

(a) a photograph taken outside a prison of an image which is being transmitted from inside the prison by electronic communications for simultaneous reception outside the prison is to be treated as a photograph taken inside the prison, and

(b) a sound-recording made outside a prison of sounds which are being transmitted from inside the prison by electronic communications for simultaneous reception outside the prison is to be treated as a sound-recording made inside the prison.’

(4) Omit subsection (2).

(5) After subsection (4) insert—

‘(4A) In proceedings for an offence under subsection (1)(aa) it is a defence for the accused to show that they did not know and had no reasonable cause to believe that the photograph was of the inside of a prison.’—(Katherine Fletcher.)

This new clause amends section 34C of the Prison Act (Northern Ireland) 1953 to include a specific offence of taking a photograph of the inside of a prison from the outside of a prison. It also clarifies that photographing or making a sound-recording of material transmitted from inside a prison is covered by the existing offence of taking a photograph or making a sound-recording inside a prison.

Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill.

New Clause 3

Unauthorised photographs and sound-recordings of prisons and prison workers: Northern Ireland

After section 34C of the Prison Act (Northern Ireland) 1953 insert—

“34D Unauthorised photograph or sound-recording of a prison worker on prison land

(1) A person is guilty of an offence if—

(a) without authorisation the person takes a photograph, or makes a sound-recording, of a prison worker while the prison worker is on prison land, and

(b) the person intends the photograph or sound-recording to record a prison worker on prison land.

(2) It is immaterial for the purposes of subsection (1) where the recording medium is located.

(3) In proceedings for an offence under this section it is a defence for the accused to show that—

(a) the accused reasonably believed that they had authorisation to do the act in respect of which the proceedings are brought, or

(b) in all the circumstances there was an overriding public interest which justified the doing of that act.

(4) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale.

34E Unauthorised uploading of a photograph or sound-recording of a prison or prison worker

(1) A person is guilty of an offence if—

(a) without authorisation, the person uploads a photograph to an internet service, and

(b) the photograph—

(i) was taken inside a prison,

(ii) is of the inside of a prison, or

(iii) records a prison worker on prison land.

(2) A person is guilty of an offence if—

(a) without authorisation, the person uploads a sound-recording to an internet service, and

(b) the sound-recording—

(i) was made inside a prison, or

(ii) records a prison worker on prison land.

(3) Subsection (1A) of section 34C (photograph or sound recording of a transmission from a prison) applies for the purposes of subsections (1)(b)(i) and (2)(b)(i) of this section as it applies for the purposes of subsection (1)(a) of that section.

(4) In proceedings for an offence under this section, it is a defence for the accused to show that—

(a) the accused did not know and had no reasonable cause to believe—

(i) in a case within subsection (1)(b)(i) or (2)(b)(i), that the photograph was taken or the sound-recording was made inside a prison;

(ii) in a case within subsection (1)(b)(ii), that the photograph was of the inside of a prison;

(iii) in a case within subsection (1)(b)(iii) or (2)(b)(ii), that the photograph or sound-recording recorded a prison worker on prison land,

(b) the accused reasonably believed that they had authorisation to do the act in respect of which the proceedings are brought, or

(c) in all the circumstances there was an overriding public interest which justified the doing of that act.

(5) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale.

(6) In this section ‘internet service’ has the meaning given by section 228 of the Online Safety Act 2023.

34F Interpretation of sections 34D to 34E

In sections 34D and 34E—

‘authorisation’ means authorisation given for the purposes of the section in question and subsections (6) to (8) of section 34C apply in relation to authorisations so given as they apply to authorisations given for the purposes of that section;

‘photograph’ has the meaning given by section 34C(11);

‘prison land’ means —

(a) land vested in the Department for a purpose connected with the provision, running or management of a prison, and

(b) other land in which the Department has an interest, or which is occupied by the Department, for a purpose connected with the provision, running or management of a prison;

‘prison worker’ means any of the following—

(a) a prison officer;

(b) any other person who (whether as a servant or agent of the Crown or otherwise)—

(i) works in a prison, or

(ii) visits, or attends at, a prison for the purpose of the person’s work (including voluntary work);

‘sound-recording’ has the meaning given by section 34C(11).”—(Katherine Fletcher.)

This new clause amends the Prisons Act (Northern Ireland) 1953 to create new offences of taking a photograph, or making a sound-recording, of a prison worker on prison land and uploading content relating to prisons to a internet service.

Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill.

Question proposed, That the Chair do report the Bill, as amended, to the House.

[Katherine Fletcher]

I thank the members of the Committee for their valuable time today. I particularly want to thank the officials of the Ministry of Justice, the House of Commons Committee Clerks, the Hansard team and the Scottish Parliament and Northern Ireland Assembly officials. Mostly, I want to thank the people who work in HMP Garth and HMP Wymott, and prison officers across the country, for doing what can at times be a difficult job. I hope they will welcome these provisions, which will ensure their further protection at work, tackle harmful prison media, reduce distress for victims, and prevent crime in prisons and the community. I urge colleagues from across the House and in the other place to support the Bill.

[Edward Argar]

I put on record my gratitude to my hon. Friend for her Bill; to right hon. and hon. Members on this Committee; to you, Sir Robert; to the Clerk, who has helped steer the Bill smoothly through its passage thus far; to those who work in our Prison and Probation Service; and to the officials in my Department, who worked closely with my hon. Friend on this Bill and have all done a fantastic job. Although it is slightly invidious to do this, I want to put on the record my gratitude, as part of that team, to Iona, my former Private Secretary, who is now helping to deal with this legislation. It is rare that one gets the opportunity to thank one’s private office.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill, as amended, accordingly to be reported.

10:34

Committee rose.

Local Government (Pay Accountability) Bill

Committee stage
Wednesday 22nd May 2024 Public Bill Committees

The Committee consisted of the following Members:

Chair: Carolyn Harris

Brereton, Jack (Stoke-on-Trent South) (Con)

† Bristow, Paul (Peterborough) (Con)

† Clarke-Smith, Brendan (Bassetlaw) (Con)

† Everitt, Ben (Milton Keynes North) (Con)

Gardiner, Barry (Brent North) (Lab)

† Grundy, James (Leigh) (Con)

† Hoare, Simon (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)

Hopkins, Rachel (Luton South) (Lab)

† Hunt, Tom (Ipswich) (Con)

Lockhart, Carla (Upper Bann) (DUP)

Mahmood, Mr Khalid (Birmingham, Perry Barr) (Lab)

† Millar, Robin (Aberconwy) (Con)

Rimmer, Ms Marie (St Helens South and Whiston) (Lab)

† Shah, Naz (Bradford West) (Lab)

Shannon, Jim (Strangford) (DUP)

Smith, Henry (Crawley) (Con)

† Stafford, Alexander (Rother Valley) (Con)

Chris Watson, Committee Clerk

† attended the Committee

Public Bill Committee

Wednesday 22 May 2024

[Carolyn Harris in the Chair]

Local Government (Pay Accountability) Bill

10:00

[The Chair]

Before we begin, I have a preliminary reminder for Members. Please make sure that your phones are switched off or silenced. Thank you. My selection and grouping for today’s sitting is available online and in the room. One amendment has been tabled. We will have a single debate on the amendment and both clauses in the Bill.

Clause 1

Approval of certain remuneration of local government employees

[Paul Bristow (Peterborough) (Con)]

I beg to move amendment 1, in clause 1, page 2, line 23, at end insert—

“(8) In Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (exempt information for the purposes of access to meetings and documents under Part 5A of that Act), in Part 2—

(a) after paragraph 9 insert—

‘9A Information is not exempt information if it relates to a resolution of the authority to approve a salary for the purposes of section 39A(1) or (2) of the Localism Act 2011.’

(b) in paragraph 10(b), for ‘or 9’ substitute ‘, 9 or 9A’.”

This amendment will prevent a relevant authority from excluding the public from a meeting whilst it considers a resolution for the purposes of section 39A(1) or (2) of the Localism Act 2011 (see clause 1(2)) and will prevent information relating to the resolution from being excluded from documents which can be accessed in connection with the meeting.

[The Chair]

With this it will be convenient to consider the following:

Clause stand part.

Clause 2 stand part.

[Paul Bristow]

The Bill seeks to increase the transparency and democratic oversight of senior pay and reward across relevant authorities in local government. Local authorities are independent employers; however, the Government consider that the highest salaries in local Government should be subject to greater democratic scrutiny. The Bill requires relevant authorities to gain approval by resolution before advertising a role, or appointing a person to a role, with an annual salary that exceeds £100,000. This will apply only to new appointments.

Hon. Members will be aware that in places such as Peterborough and, I am sure, Ipswich, Bassetlaw, Leigh, Rother Valley, Milton Keynes and north Wales—[Interruption.] Oh, and Dorset! In such places, someone who earns more than £100,000 is probably one of the highest-paid people living in that area. There is already statutory guidance that states that local authorities should be doing what the Bill requires, but the Bill seeks to make what is currently only guidance into a legal requirement.

Before I come to the clauses, which are of course what we are here to discuss, I want to thank everyone who has helped to bring the Bill forward so far. I thank all the relevant people, offices and officials at the Department for the work they have done, and I thank everyone who is here today to support and scrutinise the Bill. I also thank my researcher, Rhys Evans, who probably knows far more about the Bill than I do and has been instrumental in helping me to bring it forward. That comes from the very bottom of my heart: thank you all very much indeed for all your support.

Clause 1 updates the legislation relating to local government pay policy statements, by inserting a new clause into the Localism Act 2011 to create a new requirement in the process for the approval of certain remuneration paid to local government employees. It outlines how relevant authorities will be required to gain approval by resolution before advertising employment or appointing a person to a role with an annual salary of £100,000 or more, for new appointments only. The Bill will be relevant to places like Bradford; I note the attendance of the hon. Member for Bradford West.

The Bill will also apply to individuals employed by the relevant authorities on a part-time or temporary basis if the pro rata salary would meet the £100,000 full-time threshold. Clause 1 further sets out the conditions under which the Bill’s provision will take effect.

[Alexander Stafford (Rother Valley) (Con)]

My hon. Friend is making an important point about his important Bill. May I seek some clarity? Is the Bill just about job adverts, or will there be an annual update of how many new people are employed on more than £100,000 and who they are? True transparency is not just about gaining employment; it should be about the continuation, so that everyone knows where they stand. That will also help with diversity and inclusion and other such aspects, by raising people’s salaries.

[Paul Bristow]

My hon. Friend makes an interesting point. As I said, the Bill requires the relevant authorities to gain approval by resolution before not just advertising but appointing a person for a role with an annual salary that exceeds £100,000. It will apply to those who are appointed, rather than just to the advertisement element. The Bill will create greater transparency so that people are able to see much more clearly the gap between those in a local authority who are paid the most and those who are paid the least. I think that will help all decision making when it comes to pay and guidance. It will also help trade unions with some of the things they need to do to ensure that their members get a fair deal when it comes to remuneration.

Clause 2 confirms the Bill’s territorial extent as England and Wales, with application in England only, and contains measures in respect of the Bill’s commencement and on transitional and savings provisions. The clause will come into force on the day on which the Bill receives Royal Assent, and it sets out the extent, commencement and short title of the Bill.

The amendment I have tabled will provide that resolutions held for the purposes of the Bill will not qualify as information exempt from public discourse. It will ensure that the Bill’s key objective, which is to increase transparency on senior pay in local government, is met. It will ensure that any votes on salaries are held in view of the public; that transparency is incredibly important. It will prevent relevant authorities from utilising the existing exemption rules to circumnavigate the transparency requirements for salary offers. Transparency is the principle of the Bill and what we are trying to achieve, because with greater transparency and greater accountability comes better decision making.

Ultimately, the Bill seeks to ensure that proper scrutiny and accountability is in place for salary offers for senior officials that are above £100,000 for relevant authorities, in respect of new appointments only, and that openness and transparency are adhered to across the board.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (Simon Hoare)]

I am sure the Committee will be familiar with the dictum of Cecil Rhodes. He is often misquoted, but the direct quotation is:

“Remember that you are an Englishman, and have consequently won first prize in the lottery of life.”

As a Welshman, Mrs Harris, may I say that to serve under your chairmanship is to have won first prize in the lottery of life? If that does not get me some brownie points, I do not know what will. It is a pleasure to serve under my friend and colleague, Mrs Harris.

I am more than grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough for his leadership on this issue and for the work that he and his parliamentary staff have put in to furthering this important Bill. I am delighted to say that the Government support the Bill, as they support the amendment tabled by my hon. Friend, so I hope we can avoid a Division on that matter.

[Alexander Stafford]

I am glad that the Government support the Bill, but I am disappointed that they have not tabled an amendment in respect of fire authorities, to increase transparency. I am disappointed that fire authorities are exempted. Will the Minister touch on why they have been exempted and are not treated as the rest of local government is? We are all one, all local servants, and should be treated the same.

[Simon Hoare]

I think the Bill was narrow in scope for a reason—possibly for the reasons that I will touch on in a moment. My hon. Friend makes a strong point, in principle. One could argue for it under the dictum that what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Of course, it is open to my hon. Friend and others to consider authoring amendments as the Bill progresses through this place and the other place. I will leave that to him.

Let me turn to what the Bill is about—actually, let me touch for a moment on what the Bill is not about, because I think that is almost as important to stress. This is not a Bill that says, as a matter of guiding-star principle, that in the local government sector being paid more than £100,000 is a bad thing. Anybody who works closely with their local councils—irrespective of tier, but particularly although not exclusively with the unitary and/or upper-tier authorities—will know that in many respects senior officers, who in the main are the people who would command that level of remuneration, are in effect running large divisions of a multi-facing business. If we are to expect high-quality public services delivered efficiently and robustly, local government of course needs to be able to attract the brightest and the best.

One could argue, from the point of view a public service ethos, that working for the public good is of itself remuneration enough. But that will not convince the gas board, the water company or the mortgage company: “I can’t pay you this month or this year, but I am working in local government, so there’s a lovely warm and fuzzy feeling around me. Please take that as payment in lieu.” The bills need to be paid.

This is not about castigation. It is not about asserting, as is sometimes erroneously trumpeted, “Oh, everybody is paid far too much in local government.” Far from it. All of us who work closely with local government—I have the privilege to do so as both a Member of Parliament and a Minister, and colleagues on the Committee will do so with their local officers—usually come away entirely impressed by the devotion to duty, the wisdom and the commitment to public service that officers bring.

[Naz Shah (Bradford West) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris. I thank the hon. Member for Peterborough for bringing this Bill to the House. I am not sure whether this has been touched on. As somebody from a black and minority ethnic background, I welcome increased transparency, because often people in the top tiers of Government, local authorities and organisations do not reflect the local communities they serve. The reason why I support the Bill is that I hope it will add that tier of transparency and accountability for appointments, so that they can be for the best and the brightest. Often, we get accused of nepotism or are told that it is about who knows who. The Bill puts in another tier, so I welcome it and I thank the hon. Member for it.

[Simon Hoare]

I am grateful for the hon. Lady’s observation. She makes the key point that local authorities always do well to take into consideration whether the elected members as well as the officers reflect the broad demographics and composition of their communities. I know the hon. Lady was not suggesting it—I interpret her remarks as saying what I believe to be true, which is that all appointments should be made on merit—but we are not talking here about quotas or positive discrimination. I think—I am sure the Committee would agree—that positive discrimination is actually as bad as negative discrimination. We need the best people doing the best job that they can. I take the point entirely that looking like, sounding like, and resembling the communities that are being served is an important consideration, but it should not be the be-all and end-all of things.

10:15

The Bill is right, and the key word in it is, of course, “accountability”. If one is to be paid more than £100,000, which is more than a Member of Parliament secures—let us put it in context for a moment—it strikes the Government and me as absolutely right that that decision should undergo a transparent and democratic process. It will allow members, whether of a full council or a committee, meeting in public to tease and test the job description, the responsibilities and expectations and the skills and aptitude of relevant candidates, be they internal or external appointments, with regard to the appropriateness and marrying-up of the skillset versus the remuneration set out. That word “accountability” is probably the key word in the Bill.

I hope the Bill reaches the statute book. As I say, it is a valuable tool in ensuring that adequate scrutiny is in place for high-salary officers in local government, while still enabling local authorities to retain flexibility and independence on workforce pay. As my hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough rightly said, such decisions are best taken locally, with an assessment of local circumstance and how best to meet the challenge.

According to research, because this is not a theoretical Bill trying to tilt at a Don Quixote-type non-existent windmill, undertaken by the TaxPayers’ Alliance—I must confess that I have some intellectual differentials with the TaxPayers’ Alliance on some points, but on this I think it is right—more than 2,500 people employed in local authorities in England in the year 2022-23 received total remuneration of at least £100,000. Although, as my hon. Friend said, local authorities are independent employers responsible for workforce pay, the Government expect councils to demonstrate judgment and show restraint with regard to salary offers.

I say that in particular having been the Minister who took the argument from local government to the Treasury for an additional sum of money in the local government funding settlement. We know that service demands are rising as a result of a whole series of pressures arising from demographic shift and change, but it does not augment the argument hugely if one pleads poverty in one speech and starts doling out the cash in another without having that democratic imprimatur of councillors saying, “Yes, we think this is the right thing to do for the communities we seek to serve.”

As my hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough said, the Bill guarantees that there is appropriate oversight and transparency on senior pay by introducing a mandatory approval requirement—not guidance, but a mandatory requirement—for appointments to posts with an annual salary of £100,000 or more. As I say, that is an evolution of the key point. The Bill will place on a mandatory footing the already published Government guidance that we understand is being adhered to in broad terms, thereby making current arrangements more robust, giving additional certainty to head of paid service and council committees and giving confidence to the communities who, month in, month out, pay their council tax, do so in good faith and want to ensure that councils use their money wisely. It will increase transparency and provide something of a check or brake on excessive or escalating pay offers.

As I have said, I support the amendment tabled by my hon. Friend, which makes provision that resolutions held for the purposes of the Bill will not qualify as being exempt from public disclosure. That will make explicit that votes on senior salaries must be held in view of the public, thereby furthering the aims of transparency on such matters. At the heart of the Bill, which I again commend my hon. Friend for, is a reminder that the state, whether central or local, of itself has no money. We are only custodians of that which we raise through taxation, whether local or central, so nobody should recoil from the thrust of the principal proposition made by my hon. Friend with regard to the legitimacy of the Bill in helping councils to deliver value for money demonstrably and transparently for their communities.

The Government support the aim of clause 1 to update the processes for the approval of certain levels of remuneration paid to local government employees. As I have said, introducing the requirement to approve salaries of £100,000 or more is a practical way to limit pay offers. We believe the Bill covers adequately the relevant authorities in local government, and agree with the intention further to include individuals employed in a part-time or temporary basis if their full-time equivalent salary would meet or exceed the £100,000 threshold. That is an important point because we are aware that not everybody will work the traditional work pattern. Senior officers are often shared between authorities—two days here and three days there, and so on—and we think it is important to view it in the round.

Clause 1 also future-proofs the legislation by granting my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State delegated power to amend the annual salary of £100,000 as necessary through regulation made by statutory instrument. We cannot freeze the figure into permanent aspic because pressures change, and £100,000 in five years’ time will not be worth what £100,000 is worth today. It is important that there is that slidable bit of the rule to ensure that we seek to attract the brightest and the best into public service.

The Government also support clause 2, which sets out the Bill’s extent, commencement and short title. The Bill will apply to local government in England only, as local government is of course a devolved matter in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The principles underpinning the Bill proposed by my hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough are so compelling that I would be staggered if friends and colleagues in the devolved nations of the kingdom did not give good thought to what he seeks to do in English local government.

I further support the intention of clause 2 to confer two delegated powers on my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to set the commencement regulations for the Bill. That provides the Secretary of State with powers to make appropriate regulations for the intertwined purposes set out in clause 1.

In conclusion, I thank you, Ms Harris, for your chairmanship, my colleagues from across the House for joining us in Committee today and my hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough for his incredible hard work and diligence in piloting the Bill to its current place. Piloting a private Member’s Bill through this place is not an easy task—I sometimes think that it is easier to push a feather backwards in twilight, blindfolded, in a blizzard, up Everest. The Government are grateful for the attention to detail and energy that my hon. Friend has given to this issue. I wholeheartedly and warmly acknowledge all his efforts.

My hon. Friend is right to make the current arrangements more robust, to change guidance into regulation and to ensure that all relevant authorities in English local government are subject to the same democratic and transparent processes, with no postcode lottery when hiring to senior salary posts. We believe the Bill further delivers on the Government’s commitment to deliver value for money for the taxpayer and to ensure that the resources of local government are used in the most effective way and to the greatest benefit of local council tax payers.

[Paul Bristow]

I rise again to thank everybody who has contributed to get us to where we are today. I thank the officials in the Department and Committee members from across the House for what they have done. I once again thank my researcher, Rhys Evans, for all his work and, of course, I thank you, Ms Harris, for chairing this debate so skilfully.

[Alexander Stafford]

As we are giving thanks, I also thank my hon. Friend for leading this Bill. He is an assiduous Member of Parliament for Peterborough; in fact, he is the Member of Parliament for my mother and father-in-law. He is a great MP and the people of Peterborough are lucky to have him.

[Paul Bristow]

I am not sure I could be thanked any more, but there is always an opportunity for one more round of thanks if anyone wishes to do that.

[Simon Hoare]

I am a little hurt that nobody has thanked me.

[Paul Bristow]

I was just coming to that. I thank the Minister for his remarks, his advice and the skilful way he has managed this debate and responded to my speech.

I want to thank some of the senior officers at Peterborough City Council. The Minister was quite right when he said that there was not, in any way, a suggestion that senior officers in local government are not worth salaries of more than £100,000. Anyone who interprets the Bill in that way is being unhelpful. The officers at Peterborough City Council do an excellent job in the main. I particularly mention the chief executive Matthew Gladstone, and Adrian Chapman, another senior officer I deal with, along with Rob Hill and James Collingridge. They do fantastic work, and the excellent relationship I have with them as Peterborough’s Member of Parliament is testament to their professionalism. It has been six months since we had a Conservative majority in Peterborough—the council was previously run by the independents, and as of Monday is run by the Labour party—yet the openness and responsibility that I experience as the Conservative Member of Parliament show that it is not party political. The professionalism of those officials is to be admired and I thank them for everything they do.

I reiterate the point made by the hon. Member for Bradford West when she said that transparency allows for a diverse mix. It is absolutely right that we should seek to ensure that a council and its employees are representative of the community they represent. In diverse cities such as Peterborough and Bradford, that is particularly important. Allowing accountability and transparency—opening the windows and allowing air to come in—leads to better decision making and better spending of taxpayers’ money. That is something we should all seek to emulate in local and central Government. Transparency and accountability are key, and lead to better decision making when it comes to public service or the private sector. We have seen that in the House in recent scandals. When we have transparency and accountability of decision making, it leads to better government. I will now sit down, thanking everyone again for everything they have done. Let us hope that the Bill progresses further through the House.

Amendment 1 agreed to.

Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill, as amended, to be reported.

10:26

Committee rose.