Commons Chamber

Wednesday 18th June 2025

(began 5 hours, 33 minutes ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
11:34
None Portrait Q1. What steps she is taking to ban conversion practices. (904702)
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, Order, order. Order, order. Questions Order, order. Questions to Order, order. Questions to the secretary of state for women and equalities.
11:35
11:35
11:35
11:36
11:36
11:37
11:37
11:38
11:38
11:39
11:39
11:40
11:40
11:41
11:41
11:42
11:42
11:43
11:43
11:44
11:44
11:45
11:46
11:46
11:47
11:47
11:48
11:48
11:49
11:49
11:50
11:51
11:51
11:52
11:52
11:53
11:53
11:53
11:54
11:54
11:55
11:55
11:56
11:56
11:57
11:57
11:58
None Portrait Topical questions: Women and Equalities
-

Tropical.
11:58
11:59
11:59
11:59
12:00
12:00
12:01
12:02
12:02
12:03
12:03
12:04
12:05
12:05
12:06
12:06
12:08
12:09
12:09
12:10
12:11
12:12
12:13
12:13
Chris Philp Portrait Rt Hon Chris Philp MP (Croydon South, Conservative)
-
-
I do not see how she has the brass neck to claim she has it under control... When the numbers crossing the Channel this year are the highest in history. She asks about the Rwanda deterrent, she obviously was not listening to what I said earlier, the Rwanda scheme never started. And illegal in rents in Calais -- illegal immigration Calais...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, order. I wanted the question and I'm sure our constituents want to hear the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

question and the answer. The Rwanda scheme never started,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The Rwanda scheme never started, illegal immigrants in Calais were saying before the election how much they wanted the Prime Minister to get elected because he would help get elected because he would help them get to stop when Australia started a similar scheme about 10 years ago it worked within a few years ago it worked within a few months. As a consequence of the government losing control, they are government losing control, they are now accommodating growing numbers of illegal immigrants, many of whom cross the channel, in asylum hotels and flats.

The home offices and flats. The home offices suppliers are now actively offering above market deals to landlords to get hold of their properties to be get hold of their properties to be used for illegal immigrants. In the meantime, hard-pressed young people here are unable to rent or buy. So here are unable to rent or buy. So why is this government prioritising housing for illegal immigrants above housing for our young people?
12:15
12:15
12:17
12:17
12:17
12:18
12:19
12:19
12:20
12:21
12:22
12:23
12:23
12:24
12:24
12:25
12:25
12:26
12:27
12:27
12:27
12:28
12:28
12:29
12:29
12:30
12:31
12:31
12:32
12:32
12:33
12:33
12:34
12:34
12:35
12:36
12:36
12:36
12:37
12:38
12:38
Heidi Alexander Portrait Rt Hon Heidi Alexander MP, The Secretary of State for Transport (Swindon South, Labour)
-
-
With permission, I would like to make a statement on HS2. As a London councillor over 15 years ago, I remember hearing the then Labour government bold plans for high speed government bold plans for high speed rail. To link our major cities, to address the capacity needs of the future. And in the words of the then Prime Minister Gordon Brown, to join the high-speed revolution sweeping the world. It was a vision of a confident nation, a clear signal, our great towns and cities in the Midlands and the North with potential that had been untapped at best and ignored at worst could be places of opportunity and aspiration again.

That was the promise of HS2. again. That was the promise of HS2. But after a decade and 1/2 of Tory timelines, plans then delayed, roots drawn up and then cancelled, budgets calculated then blown, promises made them broken, we inherited a project that had lost the trust of the public, that created an image of a Britain woefully unable to deliver big infrastructure projects and that swathes of the country it was originally meant to serve. Phase 1 could end up becoming one of the most expensive railway lines in the world, with project costs soaring by £37 billion under previous Conservative governments.

And £2 billion of taxpayers money sunk into phase 2 work before it was cancelled by the previous government. There was also clear evidence of poor management. Despite the 22 a -- 2020 oh can be review, advising that government hold instruction contracts pending improvement in price and engineering, they pressed ahead regardless. It has been no less than a litany of failure and today I am drawing a line in the sand, calling time on years of mismanagement, flawed reporting and ineffective oversight.

It means this Government will get the job done between Birmingham and London. We will not reinstate cancelled sections we cannot afford but we will do the hard but necessary work to rebuild public trust and we had not wasted any time. Since July, we have appointed new leadership of HS2 Ltd to turn this project around. We have made clear to the new Chief Executive Mark Wilde that the priority is building the rest of the railway safety -- safely at the lowest reasonable cost, even if this takes longer.

We have started the year-long task of fundamentally resetting the project, including commissioning infrastructure expert James Stewart to lead a review into government -- governance and oversight. As part of that Reset, we have reduced financial delegations to HS2 Ltd, placing a lid on the spiralling costs until the Reset is complete and we regain confidence. We have cited the review as the scale and cost of HS2 is an organisation. I can confirm we have published the landmark James Stewart review and the Department response.

The review commissioned in October of last year by my predecessor was a tough independent look at how the Department for transport government delivers major projects. The government not only welcomes the review but we have accepted all the recommendations. My department is already delivering on these, specifically across five key areas. First, the lack of oversight and scrutiny. Quite simply there have been too many dark corners for failure to hide in. The ministerial taskforce, set up to provide oversight of HS2, had inconsistent attendance from key Ministers, including the then Transport Secretary and the then Chief Secretary to the Treasury.

The government has re-established the taskforce with full senior attendance as per the review's recommendations. A new performance program and shareholder boards will offer much-needed oversight and accountability. Secondly, the report highlights HS2 could cost the taxpayer millions more than planned. We will stop for spiralling any further by delivering all the recommendations on cost control. That starts with HS2 fundamentally changing their approach to estimating costs. It includes certainty over funding, which the Spending Review has given. It also means HS2, working with suppliers, so their contracts incentivise saving costs for taxpayers.

As far as I am concerned, suppliers should make a better return than more taxpayer money they save. Thirdly, the review identified a deficit in capability and skills, with a fundamental lack of trust between my department and HS2 Ltd. I am clear, both capability and cultural issues within HS2 must be addressed. The new Chief Executive is already strengthening the organisation, including billing critical gaps in areas such as commercial expertise. -- Filling critical gaps. He will be back by the announced today new chair.

This is a new era of leadership the project desperately needs, with Mike bringing significant experience as a former TfL Commissioner. Mark and Mike are part of the team with me that turned crossrail into the Elizabeth Line. We have done it before and we will do it again. Fourthly, Euston station. Between 2019 and 2023, HS2 Ltd provided initial designs for Houston station -- Euston station. Coming in most £2 billion over budget. When asked for a more affordable option, they offered one costing £400 million more than the first attempt.

The word affordable was clearly not part of the HS2 lexicon. The combined cost for these two failed designs, which has now been written off, was more than 1/4 of £1 billion. What's more, the previous government announced a Euston ministerial task. Unbelievably the task was never met. This Government recognises Euston is huge potential and we have already committed funding to start the tunnelling from Old Oak Common to Euston and will set out more details in our 10 year infrastructure strategy. And finally, we will use James Stuart's findings to transform infrastructure delivery across government.

Implementing real change in how we deliver infrastructure is not just for the Department of Transport, this government is committed to implementing these recommendations and adopting a new approach to delivering infrastructure as will be set out in our upcoming 10 year infrastructure strategy. In that spirit, the Prime Minister has also asked the Cabinet Secretary to consider the implications for the Civil Service and wider public sector of the issues raised in the report, including whether further action or We are wasting no time in delivering on this review.

I will update Parliament through our progress with my six monthly reports even if the information is uncomfortable. For a government that last week pledged billions in capital investment for new major projects, that believes in the power of transport infrastructure to improve lives and deliver on our Plan for Change, this level of failure cannot stand. We will learn the lessons of the past 15 years. And restore our reputation of delivering world-class infrastructure projects. Mr Speaker, I have spoken about the review.

Let me finally turn to the initial assessment which lays bare the shocking mismanagement of the project under previous governments. I will place a copy of the interim findings in the library. He stated in no uncertain terms, the overall project with respect to cost, schedule, and scope is unsustainable. Based on his advice, I see no route by which trains can be running by 2033 as planned. He reveals costs will continue to increase if not taken in hand, further outstripping the budget set by the previous government.

And he cannot be certain that all cost pressures have yet been identified. It gives me no pleasure to deliver news like this, billions of pounds of taxpayers money has been wasted by constant scope changes, ineffective contracts, and bad management. There are also allegations that part of the supply chain have been defrauding taxpayers. I have been clear these needs to be investigated rapidly and rigorously. If fraud is proven, the consequences will be felt by all involved. I have to be honest, it is an appalling mess, but it is one that we will sort out.

We need to set targets that we can confidently deliver, that the public can trust, and that will take time. Rest assured, where there are inefficiencies, we will root them out. Where further ministry or interventions are needed, I will make them without fear or favour. HS2 will finally start delivering on our watch. Mr Speaker, years of mismanagement and neglect have turned HS2 into a shadow of that vision forward 15 years ago. This government was elected on a mandate to restore trust to our politics.

That is why we won't shirk away from this challenge, and why today we turn the page for structure failures. I can think of no better mission and delivering new economic opportunities, new homes and commercial regeneration of an upscaled supply chain, all of which HS2 can still unlock. No one should underestimate the scale of the reset required. Passengers and taxpayers deserve new railways, that the country can be proud of. The work to get HS2 back on track is firmly underway under this government, and I commend this statement to the house.
12:49
Gareth Bacon Portrait Gareth Bacon MP (Orpington, Conservative)
-
-
Shadow Secretary of State. for his statement today and for updating the House on the initial findings of the HS2 review. I thank for advanced notice and copy of it. On the substance of her statement, I believe there is broad consensus in this House today on the central point which is that mistakes were made in the delivery of HS2. As the secretary of state has noted, costs more than doubled, the project has been repeatedly delayed and the pandemic completely changed travel plans changing the assumptions that guided the original plans, and construction costs have risen sharply across the world as a result of the supply chain shortages as the world emerged from the crisis.

It has long been apparent that HS2 was not going according to plan. In my first two he is a member of this as I sat on the Public Accounts Committee, then shared by the member for Hackney South and Shoreditch. In the summer of 2021, published report on HS2 raising serious concerns in a number of areas with recommendations for how to improve the project. In 2023, previous government considered that HS2 was not going to plan and made fundamental changes to it. As a result, there is a cancellation of the northern leg of HS2.

Under the Network North plan, £36 billion was to be diverted to a multitude of transport projects that will benefit more people in more places more quickly than the then government believed HS2 could. We also recognise that the path we took to reach that point was not perfect, far from it. I will not today pretend that the Network North plan was not the product of mistakes we made in the handling of HS2 exactly was. As a country, we must learn from those mistakes and not repeat them.

It is on that note with your permission I would like to express my gratitude to the chief executive officer of HS2 for the continued efforts supporting the delivery of the project. Recognising his leadership in rescuing the crossrail project in London, the then Secretary of State for transport appointed him in May 2024. We are all encouraged to see him playing a leading role in overseeing the completion of the project because his experience was invaluable in getting it back on track. I would also like to welcome the new chairman of HS2 Ltd.

Like the secretary of state and owe him from my years in London politics when he was Commissioner. He is a very capable man I wish you well in his new role. Secretary of state has informed the house of her intention to accept 89 recommendations from the independent review into HS2. I've not yet seen a copy of this report which I believe is being released today. While we will need to study these proposals carefully before confirming our support for them, I can assure her that if they offer better value for taxpayers we will back them.

Finally the secretary of state has raised concerns that taxpayers may have been defrauded by subcontractors. I would like to assure her that if that proves to be the case I will share her anger was supported of action is necessary to get to the bottom of it. I would request you keep the House informed as the investigations progress. In closing, I would like to press the Secretary of State on a number of matters. In recent weeks, several projects have been announced by the government that are either funded by Network North or aligned with its commitments.

However, we have yet to see a clear government treatment to other fully support the Network North plan or to scale it back. Can that secretary of state provide a definitive update on what will proceed on what will be abandoned? It has been reported that officials are considering a plan backed by the Mayor of Greater Manchester to build and upgrade and HS2 track between Birmingham and Crewe. Would you confirm if that is true? I would like to conclude by turning to the planning system more generally.

The whole House will recall that HS2 grappled with legal challenges, proceedings and judicial reviews, all of which added to delay and cost. What assessment has the Secretary of State made the extent to which legal challenges and judicial reviews are made? How can future infra structure projects be protected from excessive more politically motivated litigation? And finally, does the secretary of state leave that sufficient action has been taken to prevent some of the more spurious concerns about such things as bats obstructing vital future infra structure projects? projects?
12:54
Heidi Alexander Portrait Rt Hon Heidi Alexander MP, The Secretary of State for Transport (Swindon South, Labour)
-
-
I thank the honourable gentleman for his response, and indeed for the tone in which he made his comments. I was pleased to hear him acknowledge that mistakes have been made on HS2 by the previous government. I think you describe the path has not been perfect. I would go as far as saying it has been a shambolic mess. He did strike a sombre note in his remarks. I would ask him perhaps to consider going further once he's had the opportunity to read the full James Stewart report because I do think an apology on the part of the party opposite for the mess that they left this infrastructure scheme in is undoubtedly warranted.

I also thank him for the comments he made about the action HS2 is taking with regard to the alleged fraud within the supply chain. I can assure him that I will provide appropriate updates to this House on the progress with the HMRC investigation is now underway. He also asked me to set out our plans for investment in transport in the Midlands and the North. His party of course took the decision to cancel HS2 north of Birmingham.

They made wild promises about what they would do with the money that they claimed they were saving. He is kidding himself if he thinks that that money ever existed. What this government did last week in the Spending Review was set out £15.6 billion of money to invest in local transport schemes across the country. Be that in Birmingham, Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle. His approach was a fantasy. He promised the moon on a stick and have absolutely no means to deliver stop he asks me to set out the government's planned for enhancing rail connectivity further in the Midlands and the North.

I can assure him that further announcement will be being made both as part of the government 10 year National Infrastructure Strategy and beyond that in the weeks and months ahead. He also asks me to opine on the extent to which litigation has caused delays in the delivery of infra structure projects. He will know that through this government's planning and infrastructure Bill we are tackling this issue, limiting the number of judicial reviews and legal challenges that can be made.

Because, unlike his party, this government is serious about delivering the structure. We are serious about providing the stable leadership that this country needs when it comes to infrastructure. I looked up before coming to the chamber today the number of rail ministers that existed in the Department under his government. It was the sum total of 18 in 12 years. It is no wonder that objects like this were left in such a state of disarray. Let me tell this House that, just as this government has returned to stability to the nations economy, we will return commonsense and stable leadership to the delivery of the nations infrastructure as well.
12:57
12:58
12:59
Paul Kohler Portrait Mr Paul Kohler MP (Wimbledon, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Mr Speaker. I thank the Secretary of State for his statement and for advanced sight of it. What and for advanced sight of it. What we have heard today is clearly a damning indictment of the damning indictment of the Conservative mismanagement, high- speed rail is meant to boost economic growth and spread economic growth and spread opportunity. High-speed rail network opportunity. High-speed rail network connecting London and Manchester and Leeds was clearly the right one. We ended up with years of delay and billions of pounds of taxpayers billions of pounds of taxpayers money poured down the drain with no end in sight.

A litany of errors the secretary of state as outlined is truly shocking. It shows the truly shocking. It shows the Conservatives were comatose at the Conservatives were comatose at the wheel. And it has left us with a drastically reduced high-speed rail drastically reduced high-speed rail at an inflated price. Shocking allegations of fraud by subcontractors are emblematic of the Tory lack of oversight and disinterest in properly safeguarding the public interest of public money. As we have already seen in the scandal of PPE and procurement scandal of PPE and procurement string Covid.

Will the Minister ensure any money lost to fraud as Covaxin as possible? I asked the Covaxin as possible? I asked the secretary of state three things. Can she guarantee that if any fraud has taken place, any money lost will be returned to the government and her department as soon as possible? And please provided with necessary resources to fully investigate the matter? The secretary of state has said the ministerial task force set up to provide oversight on HS2, and inconsistent attendance from the then transport secretary and Chief Secretary to the Treasury.

Does the secular state agree these right honourable members should apologise for these damning lapses? Thirdly, we share the secretary of state confidence in Mark Wilde and Mike Brown. Can she say when she expects to be able to give the House next 's assessment of the costs of the scheme and HS2 are finally up and scheme and HS2 are finally up and
13:01
Heidi Alexander Portrait Rt Hon Heidi Alexander MP, The Secretary of State for Transport (Swindon South, Labour)
-
-
The honourable gentlemen raises three very fair issues and agree with his assessment that the government were not Justice Eady the will, they were comatose at the will. -- The previous government not just asleep at the wheel, they were comatose at the wheel. I can assure him no stone will be and turned in getting to the bottom of this matter. He is also right to highlight the question of poor and inconsistent attendance by previous individuals who held either my role or the rail minister's role and treasury roles.

I think it is imperative that politicians who have oversight for these infrastructure schemes stay close to the detail of what is happening, both through their own officials and directly with the executive and non-executive leadership of the project, that is sadly what I intend to do. I know the rail minister has a monthly meeting with the new chief executive. We have already held a meeting with the ministerial task. There is another one due very soon. I have had multiple one-to-one conversations with the leadership team at HS2.

He asks when I will be in a position to provide a full update on costs and schedule. Mark Wilde has told me that he will require until the end of this year to do that full piece of work. I am not prepared to get ahead of that piece of work because I think that is the way we have got into problems previously. But he can rest assured that soon as I do have more information, in addition to the six monthly report that I will provide monthly report that I will provide to Parliament, I will come back to this House.
13:03
13:04
13:05
13:06
13:06
13:07
13:07
13:08
13:09
13:10
13:11
13:12
13:13
13:14
13:14
13:15
13:16
13:16
13:17
13:18
13:18
13:19
13:19
13:20
13:20
13:21
13:21
13:22
13:22
13:23
13:24
Dave Robertson Portrait Dave Robertson MP (Lichfield, Labour)
-
-
Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. My constituency the only one in the country which has HS2 phase I, phase 2A and 2B in it. When he so it will not continue north of Birmingham, that is not true because it will cut through my constituency. The failings of HS2 Ltd have been cleared to my constituents for years. Hearing today what we have always expected the dereliction of oversight from previous governments is quite frankly shocking. People across Lichfield and villages will be furious.

They are quite right to be so. Farmers and landowners and businesses in my constituency have been fighting tooth and nail with HS2 for years to get them to do the job right, whether it is compulsory purchases that have never been paid, temp repossessions that come with a multitude of back-and-forth and land agents taking massive fees over things that should have been sorted years ago. Payments that never come and many many more. The people have had to deal with ongoing roadworks around the junction which has become far too complicated by trying to put a railway underneath it.

The village at times has always been cut off. People are absolutely sick of HS2. The failings of that organisation a multitude, and the failings of the party opposite to hold it to account should be an embarrassment for them and an embarrassment for the country. I do welcome the reset but it has got to lead to meaningful change. Can she give me and my constituents any assurances that this will be delivered as quickly as possible with as little disruption as we can get away with, because she finally give us a timeline on when the safeguarding land will be returned to landowners? Does the going on for far to long.

going on for far to long.
13:26
13:26
13:27
13:27
13:28
13:29
13:29
13:29
13:31
13:31
13:32
13:32
13:33
13:33
13:34
13:34
13:35
13:36
13:37
13:37
13:38
13:39
13:39
13:40
13:41
13:41
13:42
13:42
13:43
13:43
13:43
13:44
13:45
13:45
13:47
None Portrait Points of Order
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Point of order. Thank you. I wish to raise again
13:47
13:48
13:49
None Portrait Presentation of bills
-

Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Tomorrow.
13:49
None Portrait Ten Minute Rule Motion: Right to Manage and Leasehold
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Tomorrow. Tomorrow. Rachel Blake.
13:49
Rachel Blake Portrait Rachel Blake MP (Cities of London and Westminster, Labour )
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I beg to move leave be given to bring in a Bill to make provision about the definition of qualifying tenants for the purposes of claiming tenants for the purposes of claiming a right to manage. To reduce the proportion of qualified tenants proportion of qualified tenants required, to give notice of a claim to acquire a right to manage, establish a duty of freeholders to assist a Right to Manage company and establishing contact with leaseholders within the freehold property to make provision about establishing a presumption in favour of a Right to Manage in certain circumstances before the First Tier circumstances before the First Tier Tribunal.

Requiring the Secretary of State to review procedures for converting leasehold property into these types of properties and these types of properties and connected purposes. I stand in this chamber today to speak on a topic which matters dearly to all of us in this house. Accountability and this house. Accountability and representation. As legislators, our job is to hold legislation to job is to hold legislation to account and make sure it represents account and make sure it represents our constituents and it is the role of our constituents in turn to hold us to account whenever elections us to account whenever elections arise.

At this moment I thank my constituents for joining us today to listen. Accountability is at the heart of our consumer relationships. With standards and competition embedded into commercial law. It is a key part of our social contract when someone in a position of power does wrong. There needs to be a system of records. When it comes to housing however, this too often goes out the window. Frequently there exists a stark gap between those who provide housing and those who live provide housing and those who live in it.

Alongside an accountability deficit. Whether in private rented, social housing, or in a sector this bill seeks to remedy today, leasehold. My constituency has the highest proportion of leaseholders in the country. Apologies, Madam Deputy Speaker. They have had to endure a system leaving them without full control over their homes and at the mercy of a wide range of bad actors. I was proud to be elected on a manifesto that promised to ban the sale of new leasehold properties and to make commonholds the default tenure across the country.

Since the election, the government has acted with speed in this area, inheriting a rushed piece of legislation from their predecessors and now handling it with speed, setting out plans for reform. Publishing a white paper on commonhold and expediting moves such as the recent reforms in other areas. They have already had a positive impact in London and Westminster. Constituents have written and said they submitted Right to Manage applications on March 3 this year as the changes allow them to do so.

I joined them in thanking this government for acting quickly in this area. I look forward with interest to the publication of the leasehold and commonhold reform bill later this year. One of the most visible consequences of the leasehold system is the scourge of unscrupulous managing agents. For the last six months, I have been coordinating action, alongside the honourable member for Hendon, as the co-chairs of the Labour for leaseholders group. An alliance of 150 Labour Party colleagues against some of the worst performing actors in the sector.

Many of the members supporting the bill today have been tirelessly advocating in this campaign for leaseholders in their constituencies and nationwide and I pay tribute to this work. We have heard stories of residents suffering at the hands of managing agents as they failed to conduct essential maintenance. Engaging in threatening, abusive behaviour towards residents. Even running off with hundreds of thousands of pounds of leasehold money. All while providing little justification for their service. Often with high fees charged. I have also in this process met the most dedicated leaseholders, organisers collecting testimony from thousands of neighbours highlighting poor practice.

Accountants volunteering their time to scrutinise invoices and auditing and lawyers who have provided free advice to other buildings going through the First Tier Tribunal. But without a legal system that supports them, these leaseholders remain unable to seek the accountability they deserve from a distant, disinterested managing agent. These include my constituents in Neville House. Shared ownership pay £5000 for service charges for services not delivered for 20 years. Reports of mould ignored for months. Being stuck between the social landlord, managing agent and freeholder in a complex cladding case.

They include the residents of Sheldon Square where managing agents have ignored the leaking of sewage into their flat. They have been billed for damage caused to their building and received threatening letters post to individual leaseholders in frequent reach of data protection. The residents of Oxford and Cambridge mansions have had their managing agent and freeholder ignore respond -- report of gross misconduct, failing to take action against leaks persisting for years and ignoring reports of damp and mould emerging from flat which they owned and were using as storage rooms all the while complex major works loom with an opaque process which may cost residents millions.

Ultimately this situation amounts to 1 of accountability and representation. In most cases, the managing agent does not feel a need to represent the interests of leaseholders and the only accountability they have is to the building freeholder who too often take little interest in the welfare of residents. But there are ways out. One is acquiring the Right to Manage. This involves forming a Right to Manage association. Recruiting half of the flats in the block to join and submitting an application to the landlord.

Who can accept all drag leaseholders through a tribunal. However, there are multiple loopholes and hurdles obstructing leaseholders from achieving even this basic step. Properties cannot have more than 30% of square footage of commercial space and sometimes even flowerbeds and communal car parks are included. Even when large numbers of residents are in favour of getting the right to manage and nobody opposes, hitting the 50% threshold can be difficult. It is due to a number of reasons from owners who do not live in the properties, freeholders who retain a large number of flats in the building, and letting out privately, and as mentioned, as storage rooms stop this goes some way towards rectifying it.

It would lower the threshold required for a successful Right to Manage application from 50% of qualifying leaseholders down to 35. As many campaigners pointed out, this alone is not enough. That is why the motion redefines who is defined as a qualifying tenant during an application. To those who respond positively or negatively when tenants are asked to vote. Put simply it changes the threshold from a Right to Manage claim from can you get the majority of owners in your building to do enough of the actual leaseholders in your block want this to go ahead? Most notably it establishes a duty for freeholders to assist the Right to Manage company when it contacts fellow leaseholders.

Establishing a presumption in favour of leaseholders on occasions when freeholders counterclaim at the First Tier Tribunal. This motion doesn't go all the way to fixing the Right to Manage. There are a number of obstacles remaining. Particularly in mixed use developments. There are no quick fixes in the Right to Manage, commonhold or any other reform. Managing blocks of flats will always remain challenging and will lead to difficult debates within buildings as to how to manage complex and expensive work. But what matters is the companies who manage these buildings are accountable.

And represent fairly the people living in the buildings. And reinvigorating the Right to Manage means we can do it. Leaseholders across the country are ready to take this step in holding their managing agents to account. All they need is for the account. All they need is for the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

law to be on their side. The question is the honourable member have leave to bring in the bill. As many as are of the opinion bill. As many as are of the opinion say aye. To the contrary, no. The say aye. To the contrary, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it. Who will prepare and bring in the bill?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I will. Can you read the names of the sponsors? Lizzi Collinge, Doctor Beccy

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Lizzi Collinge, Doctor Beccy Cooper, Deirdre Costigan, Emily Darlington, Marsha de Cordova, Anna Darlington, Marsha de Cordova, Anna Dixon, Amanda hat, Jayne Kirkham, Uma Kumaran, Sarah Russell.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Right Right to Right to Manage Right to Manage fleeceholder bill. Second Reading, what day?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

July 4.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

July 4. July 4. The clerk will proceed to read the orders of the day. Crime and Policing Bill as unaided in the committee to be further considered. Now.
13:59
14:00
Tonia Antoniazzi Portrait Tonia Antoniazzi MP (Gower, Labour)
-
-
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I was proud to have stood on a pledge to halve violence against women and girls in a decade. I know colleagues on the frontbench take this seriously. There are significant measures in this bill on intimate image abuse, stalking, spiking and sexual exploitation and I know this is only the beginning of a mission to tackle these shameful a mission to tackle these shameful There is a national enquiry rightly getting underway on this subject and we must confront adult sexual exploitation being perpetrated on an industrial scale by websites and men who pay for sex, both of whom currently enjoy near total legal impunity.

Those against the commercial sexual exploitation -- those laws against commercial cyclic particular paddles are dated. They are failing women overwhelmingly. Websites for pimping function as massive online brothels and operate freely and supercharge sex trafficking by making it easier and quicker for exploiters to advertise the. These online mega brothels make millions of pounds and advertise thousands of vulnerable women from across the world for prostitution in the UK. Our legislation allows this. Men who pay for sex are often left out of the conversation on prostitution and sex trafficking but are they beating heart of the trade.

The demand and money drives sex trafficking trade and there is little done to deter them. Let's start the process by making it crystal clear that as a parliament it is not possible to bisexual consent. Giving someone money, accommodation, goods, services in exchange for sex acts is sexual exploitation and abuse and is never acceptable and we need to change that.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable lady for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable lady for giving way and commend her for bringing this forward. The honourable lady is well aware that in Northern Ireland, through the in Northern Ireland, through the in Northern Ireland, through the Assembly and Lord Morrow, brought in legislation for that to happen. High is the honourable lady had the is the honourable lady had the opportunity to look at the change put through in Stormont? I think put through in Stormont? I think what she has put forward is even better than what we put forward to Stormont and the Assembly.

Does she Stormont and the Assembly. Does she feel that women will be protected from sex exploitation, as she has from sex exploitation, as she has said that she would like to see? There I thank him for his There I thank him for his contribution. He is right to say there is excellent good practice in there is excellent good practice in Northern Ireland and this is something the Select Committee is looking at at the moment and they looking at at the moment and they might be interested in that as well.

We currently have...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We currently have... Why should we implement this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Why should we implement this model on sex work when the evidence for the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland shows that there is increased violence?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It's obvious the honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It's obvious the honourable member and myself do not look at it through the same lens. Prostitution through the same lens. Prostitution and not sex work. I think we have got to see more examples of that got to see more examples of that actually being used. What we currently have is a situation where currently have is a situation where people paying for sex enjoy near total impunity and the vulnerable total impunity and the vulnerable women that the exploit will face sanctions if they solicit on the sanctions if they solicit on the street.

Fines handed out to women in a self-defeating effort to stop them soliciting on the street, ignoring the question of where they are most the question of where they are most likely to earn the money to pay the likely to earn the money to pay the fine and the sanctioning of victims is counter-productive in ending this ruthless trade. That is why I have ruthless trade. That is why I have tabled my amendments, NC2, 3 and 4. tabled my amendments, NC2, 3 and 4.

And sex trafficking. Three and four together would shift the burden of criminality of the victims of exploitation and onto perpetrators. NC3 Would make it a criminal offence to pay for sex, sending a clear message this is not an acceptable way to treat women and men would way to treat women and men would face prosecution. We know from research that this would be an effective deterrent. Over 50% of 1200 sex buyers question in one study said that they would definitely, possibly change behaviour if a law was introduced to make it a crime to pay for sex.

And repealing sanctions against victims of sexual exploitation, soliciting on the street, NC4 would help victims and help them rebuild their lives. It is also necessary to end the stigmatisation that these women continue to experience. That is why I have tabled amendments of 19 to introduce a mechanism for that. The home affairs Select Committee has recommended the Home Office should change existing legislation so that soliciting is no longer an offence and legislate for previous convictions and cautions for prostitution from the record of sex workers by amending the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act.

For most women, the record of convictions is a record of exploitation and abuse and 11th year of having to disclose this history when applying for jobs or volunteering. Decriminalising the offences and 11 for the expunging of historical convictions will allow them to finally be free of the record of abuse at the stigma that they have endured for decades. My amendments would usher in the legal framework that recognises prostitution is violence against women and the only way to end this violence is the terror the perpetrators and profiteers.

I am delighted that over 50 honourable members have signed the amendments and I would like to thank in particular the members of the Committee on Sexual Exploitation which I chair. They are informed and supportive for survivors and many frontline services. Unsurprisingly, some of my proposals are created by pimping websites, one of which emailed allies, urging them to mobilise against my amendments. A recent investigation from Sky News found over 50% of the 14,000 prostitution adverts on Aviva Street had a full number.

-- Viva. This is a red flag for exploitation. These My proposals. I want to address a myth promoted by the defenders of the website that is that shutting down the sex will make the difference to the skill of sexual exploitation taking place and simply drive it to the dark web and make it harder to identify. This is patently nonsense, lacking logic and evidence. The dark web carries major disadvantage for traffickers and sex buyers and would require a significant technical expertise to post as well as locate and access prostitution adverts and thereby it was substantially restrict the pool of exploiters able to engage in the crime.

There is no evidence that the shift is taking place in jurisdictions that have allowed pimping websites. The reality is that right now we simply cannot keep up with the scale of sexual exploitation taking place on the open web. Another myth I want to address was visible in the written submissions which were submitted to the committee. Every single one of the organisations who argue the website should be allowed to operate described prostitution as, "Sex work." This idea that paying someone to perform sex acts is ordinary and that it is the equivalent of ordering a cappuccino is a pernicious and harmful myths.

Prostitution is violence against women. As we aim to put pimps and traffickers out of business, we must prevent them from this and address the historic issues with victims and abuse and I thank the front bench for up engagement on this issue and I look forward to working with them closely.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Commercial Exploitation by a Third Party. Speak the Question Is That Clause 2 Be Read a Second Time.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

That Clause 2 Be Read a Second Time. I Rise to Speak to the New

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I Rise to Speak to the New Clauses 12 and 123 and My Name and the Clauses in the Name of the the Clauses in the Name of the Member for Tunbridge Wells and in the name of my right honourable
14:10
Karen Bradley Portrait Rt Hon Dame Karen Bradley MP (Staffordshire Moorlands, Conservative)
-
-
the name of my right honourable friend from Gosport, 121. I would like to start with those new clauses and 43, 121. I would like to start with those new clauses and 40 362 comments the Harassment and Public Act which was taken through to a Private Members' Bill. Greg Clark did great work on this bill and I was a member and a member of the Bill committee and spoke at the second and third reading and spoke on the committee and there was cross-party support and it was not controversial in any way in terms of being legislation and in many ways it was correcting an oversight in the law that happened and had been missed out on in previous legislation and the problem is that it statutory instruments to commence and it has not yet been brought forward to this House.

I am sure the Minister is well aware and is looking to do so. This new clause allows the commencement to start now rather than being a statutory employment. It could save her time so I hope she would look favourably on this to say this act is supported across parties and there is no division and it is something we all want to see and I hope the government accepts the new clause and the honourable gentleman can follow on in the steps of his predecessor in making sure this act becomes live and real for these becomes live and real for these people.

In turning to the new clause, my honourable friend from Gosport, I have supported this and I was almost disappointed not to table it myself because it fits in terms of the work I have done previously on these issues and the Secretary of State has brought this in the Digital Economy Bill and we looked at this for pornography, for example. This is a simple piece of legislation which would mean non- fatal strangulation is a criminal act in pornography. This is not impacting what normal people wish to do in their private lives but it means the images could not be available to be seen in pornographic films and that means there is protection for children who may look at this and do not want to but we recognise it happens and it means it does not normalise something which is a dangerous act and should not be promoted in any way and I know from promoted in any way and I know from experience that the social media companies will remove it if it's a legal and stored filming it will become legal content and social media companies will be forced to act.

I hope we can support this across the House and it will be pushed to division this evening and I hope the Minister can say something about the government introducing something similar perhaps in the other place so we can make sure this inappropriate content is illegal and not available to be seen by children. My honourable friend has been a champion of this and I know that he has to go out to:30 and I wish to speak to it and wish you a happy birthday.

-- 2:30. He is spending his Brett Lee in the chamber and doing DLs. I think this will have cross-party support. -- Spending his birthday. This is only The section on sexual abuse against children. There is amazement that anyone convicted of a sexual offence against a child may be allowed to have parental responsibility for their own child. It is only the case that it is stopped if the offences committed against their own child. This simply cannot be right. I can be possibly, in a situation where I convicted sex offender, someone who has been convicted of a sexual offence against a child, is then allowed to make parental decisions about their own children.

The constituent of my honourable friend who talked about this, and I believe they have been a real champion on this issue because, in this case, a man who was convicted of raping a relative who was a child still has parental responsibility for his own child. This cannot be acceptable. It feels like it is a piece of legislation that at some point we failed to address this issue but can be seen as a defect in the legislation that we all agree should

**** Possible New Speaker ****

New clause 12 is a relatively

**** Possible New Speaker ****

New clause 12 is a relatively simple amendment to the Modern Slavery Act. It reflects a phenomenon we didn't know about when we introduced the act 10 years ago. I was still minister on that act and I was still minister on that act and remember taking things through many definitions about what constitutes trafficking and exploitation. But at trafficking and exploitation. But at the time of the bill, orphanage tracking -- trafficking was simply not known. This may be a shock to not known.

This may be a shock to the chamber. It is something where the chamber. It is something where there is more awareness of it in Australia and but we don't know about it here. It is the phenomenon about it here. It is the phenomenon Up and they are not orphanages. We think this is where children with no think this is where children with no parents go to be looked after because the state doesn't have any other way to look after them. In this country and across the Western world we don't want to put children into institutions like that.

We want them to be in family settings. To make sure they are fostered and have the right support. Orphanages exist the right support. Orphanages exist around the world. In the case of these orphanages, they are not orphanages. More than 80% of the orphanages. More than 80% of the children are not orphans. They have been put into these institutions which are not registered with the authorities to raise money. They are simply about raising money. And the foundation estimates there are 5.4 million children globally living in these institutions.

This is something that is a horror. When it is put to people and digested, 5 million children, more than 80% of them have parents, have been taken from their parents purely to raise money. There is utter disbelief. How money. There is utter disbelief. How can this be a situation today? It is estimated the Christian church in the United States gives $3.3 billion per year to institutions to look after children and they are not orphanages. They are simply there to raise money.

Imagine being on a cruise around Southeast Asia and one of your excursions, which has happened and did happen, one of the excursions is to view the orphanage. Read stories to children. Pay money for the privilege of going to read a story to the children. How cruel is that? Think about it. This is a child who has been put in this institution and perhaps their families believe they were going to be put there for a better life. For education. I don't blame the families necessarily.

But these children are there to raise money. A busload of tourists turn up and sit down and read a story to these children. Kind Western people who give money and then these children are left. They don't have any are left. They don't have any further contact with these people. They might be gap year students who decided they were going to spend a bit of their time working in one of these institutions and they are in South America, Africa, Southeast Asia, it is across the world.

Those young people are doing what they believe is right. They are doing what they believe is the right thing. But actually they are being exploited. These children are there simply to raise money. My amendment changes the Modern Slavery Act. Adding one further definition into section 3, the section which has definition of exploitation and it adds the definition of modern slavery exploitation, orphanage trafficking. It would just mean we in our legislation would reflect on orphanage trafficking within law. I think there is more we need to do but this is a simple first step to make sure it is recognised.

That would mean they would raise awareness but also individuals and organisations that wish to give money to these orphanages would potentially be in breach of the Modern Slavery Act and steps can be taken against them. I would not wish to criminalise anybody doing their best and wanting to do right by people. But I think it is important we do that. We would also be the second country in the world to mark this and the only other country that has legislated for this is Australia.

I pay tribute to Linda Reynolds. She was a senator. I think she has just stopped but she is an incredible woman and she took up this issue. She has gone round the world with it. 's fault legislated change -- she has fault legislated change. She has taken it up with the union and they have issued a law making guy to stop orphanage trafficking and has passed resolutions around raising awareness. Linda Reynolds is absolutely a hero on this issue. She spoke to 1 of these orphanages herself and she said she walked away saying this is not right.

It doesn't feel right. It doesn't feel authentic. These children don't seem to be looked after. This doesn't seem to be something I want to support. I ask the Minister again and I believe this is not a new clause which will be selected for a separate decision today but I would ask the Minister to reflect on the steps the government may take and if the government might consider bringing this back again in the other place. I will bring forward private members' bills and continue to amend legislation on this issue.

to amend legislation on this issue. I hope at some point the government can get an agreement that they need and we can reflect on this horrible

**** Possible New Speaker ****

crime in our legislation. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I really appreciate following in the wake created by my two honourable friends who have been incredible campaigners on these issues. I know from experience of meeting the victims and survivors they speak victims and survivors they speak about that there are gaping holes in about that there are gaping holes in legislation. I hope the House will
14:21
Sarah Champion Portrait Sarah Champion MP (Rotherham, Labour)
-
-
legislation. I hope the House will support their amendments because they will do something to close them. I speak first about my new clauses, nine, 10 and 18. It would seek to better protect child victims of sexual and criminal exploitation and empower frontline respondents to keep them safe. I welcome the introduction of mandatory duty to report. Which was the recommendation, recommendation 13. It can strengthen the system. However, following detailed conversations and meetings with Rotherham and Sheffield safeguarding staff, I have shared their concerns about the finer detail of implementation.

Put bluntly, this duty will not protect children as intended, unless reporters are adequately trained. Recognising reporting and crucially responding to abuse is far from straightforward. To prevent overwhelming and already strained systems, all those under the duty must be trained, know what to look for and how to report it. Let me give an example. A nursery nurse might see bruising around the genital area of a toddler. With the fear, I put it that way of mandatory reporting and a duty to do that, she will report it into a hotline or directly to the safeguarding team.

Absolutely the right thing to do. However, toddlers fall over and in awkward places. That nursery worker needs to have the skills and experience to know when it is appropriate and when it is not. What evidence to gather and what not to. At the moment I am scared that everything gets reported in. And the system there to protect and safeguard will not be able to cope. So I hope that a standard training package is given to all people falling under this duty.

I now turn to clause 10 and 18 on child criminal exploitation. It is something I know the Minister is safeguarding and is familiar with, having campaigned on it for many years in the previous parliaments will stop as the report said, right now criminally exploited children are at risk of persecution rather than protection. My amendments seek to change that and have the backing to change that and have the backing for Action for Children and many other charities. More than 2891 children were referred to the National Referral Mechanism as potential child victims of criminal exploitation in a study but many more ended up in court rooms and not safeguarding systems.

As my police chief said to me, it is deeply sad that the first time we see these criminally exploited children is when we are looking to criminalise them. We are not able to get above this and ahead of it. Clause 38 rightly creates a new offence of CCE. Recognising the severity of the abuse stop but without the corresponding changes to the act of 2015, legal protections are inconsistent and inadequate. Something clause 10 is seeking to fix stop clause 18 has a definition of criminal exploitation alongside of criminal exploitation alongside the offence in clause 28.

Evidence into the review demonstrates a current lack of a definition and it contributes to inconsistencies in practice across the country and persistent failure to identify children as victims. This is something I have seen time and again in Rotherham. Young exploited girls are all too often referred to as child prostitutes and not given the This shift only started after we got the statutory definition for child sexual exploitation. Clear, consistent legislation empowers professionals to intervene earlier. Prevent inappropriate prosecution and ensures exploited children get Amendment nine on registered sex offenders is supported by 39 cross- party MPs.

This would not be new to many in the house. I brought it up under the last three parliaments. 11,500 sex offenders were prosecuted for failing to notify changes in information between 2019 and 2022. The same ongoing pattern allows offenders to slip through the cracks with more than 700 going completely missing in those years. I welcome the measures in the bill which require some offenders to seek police authorisation before changing their name on passports and driving licences. This would make a difference and I genuinely welcome it.

I remain deeply concerned many of the new measures lack strength and could lead to confusion. Clause 80 stated sex offenders must give seven days of notice of using a new name but it does not define what using means. My amendment seeks to provide needed clarity. It will require offenders to notify the police of intention to change their name seven days before doing so by deed poll. It would allow time for the authorities to conduct appropriate risk assessments. But more than this, I want to draw attention to the fact that this bill still relies too heavily on a sex offender to do the right thing.

Something they rarely do. Finally, I speak in my capacity as chair of the international development Select Committee. I speak to clause 99 and 100. Last week my committee published a report on international humanitarian law. It is vital those responsible for attacking aid workers, unlawful blocking of humanitarian as, are brought to justice. Throughout the enquiry it became clear that the UK needed the powers to exercise universal jurisdiction over the crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.

There must be no safe haven for those who commit these crimes. These clauses allow the authorities to prosecute people suspected of these crimes without any requirement for a connection to the UK. At a time when legitimacy and impartiality of some international court is being questioned, the UK must stand firm in supporting these important mechanisms for accountability to prevent impunity after serious violations of international humanitarian law while also making sure it has the domestic power needed to hold perpetrators to account, no matter where the crimes are committed.
14:29
Iain Duncan Smith Portrait Rt Hon Sir Iain Duncan Smith MP (Chingford and Woodford Green, Conservative)
-
-
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I speak to new clause 5 in my name and that of my honourable friends around the House in different political positions. Before I do that, I do have a moment where I want to congratulate the government. Unusual from the opposition but I congratulate them anyway. I want to talk about the conclusion of the cuckooing amendment, which was criticised in the last Parliament and it has been passport it through to this and it is now a criminal offence.

This will help those who are taken over in their houses, the vulnerable, the elderly and when crimes are committed in these houses, it will give the police a reason to go in without explicit knowledge of the crime being committed other than the cuckooing. I do thank the government for making that now a law and it will go through hopefully without too much of a problem in the other place. I am rising on new clause 5 which is consequential on an amendment which again I thank the government for doing which is on cycling, reckless and dangerous cycling.

There were no offences relevant to this. People have been killed and injured in the course of bad behaviour on the roads by cyclists and in particular a campaigner on this issue is the reason why I brought this forward. The government has accepted that and it is now bound in again to this legislation. But there was some issue at the same time about the We know that e-bikes are now responsible for some of the worst crimes on the streets, antisocial behaviour and threatening behaviour as well.

Because they are silent and can creep up on people quickly, you will find a lot of them are being used in crimes of snatching things. Moving away from those that are legal, and I will come back to that in a second, legal e-bikes are a problem in the way that they have failed to be prosecuted by the police. The problem is that, like cycles, they are not included in the relevant legislation that allows them to be prosecuted for offences that they commit, dangerous, reckless etc, normal for bicycles.

The interesting thing is that there is a growing huge problem and there were 462 pedestrian casualties resulting from cycles including e- bikes and data indicate 11,266 incidents involving e-bikes and e- scooters in 2023-24, an increase from 10,000 the previous year. The rise partly reflects the growing number of riders and concerns regarding the reckless behaviour of users. Riders of e-bikes are more likely to be involved in accidents compared to traditional cyclists. The injury severity with accidents on e-bikes, they are nearly twice as likely to cause severe injuries and twice as likely to require surgical intervention compared to conventional bicycles.

There are accidents at the moment and not to mention the illegal and enhanced e- bikes which the honourable that he will now are the cause of even more significant issues. I have mentioned this in the new clause 5 because it was our impression that the initial requirement did not deal properly with the e-bikes but after a long debate with the transport Department and a heavy look through some legislation that already existed, I must say that I have finally agreed with them that because the original amendment on cycling was laid down, the definition of an e-bike under the cycling element now incorporates them into the original amendment

**** Possible New Speaker ****

from the government. I have a similar concern about

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I have a similar concern about mobility scooters. Obviously they are a fabulous tool for many in the are a fabulous tool for many in the constituency to get out and about the number of serious injuries caused by the scooters has gone up caused by the scooters has gone up by nearly 60% in the last year and the number of fatalities has the number of fatalities has doubled. They can go up to 8 miles an hour and go on the roads but they an hour and go on the roads but they are not subject to insurance rules and cannot be penalised under dangerous driving regulation either.

Does he agree that the government should consider this carefully should consider this carefully moving forward? I would love the Minister to look at whether there is Minister to look at whether there is any legislation that would be implementable in cases like this.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

implementable in cases like this. And grateful to my honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And grateful to my honourable friend for that. She is right. We friend for that. She is right. We have to focus on what is in essence new clause 5, bicycles and e-bikes. new clause 5, bicycles and e-bikes. The definition of a legal e-bike is one that uses pedals and is used to assist the cyclist. All the other ones are legal and this brings me to the problem which we have. If this will go through, as it will, in law, then, in reality, the question mark is, will the government press release to start arresting and prosecuting people who deliberately use the bikes for nefarious purposes and those who use it dangerously on parts because they are more dangerous in the sense that they are e-bikes and get up to higher speed, even though they are supposed to be governed.

They are still higher than most cyclists in the normal act of We had a discussion about this earlier. On the subject of legal e- bikes, would he agree that the illegal conversion kits which are accessible online which allow an ordinary bicycle to do 30-40 mph must be clamped down on. We discussed this before and the government has said it is for the local authority trading standards to have the power to stop that. have the power to stop that.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

My honourable friend raises that point at an opportune time because I was about to get onto it. We are on the same side so I thank him for the same side so I thank him for giving way. The real problem that we giving way. The real problem that we have got is for the government to maybe do something in the other maybe do something in the other place. All other non-bicycle electricity-supported cycles are electricity-supported cycles are legal or have to be on the road and qualify for road use, which means, qualify for road use, which means, qualify for road use, which means, in many cases, either passing a test or treating it like a car or motorcycle.

The problem with that is motorcycle. The problem with that is most people do not know that. They are either ignorant of it or do not care. The thing is that they can buy care. The thing is that they can buy these illegal bikes in legal shops in the UK and to me that seems in the UK and to me that seems in the UK and to me that seems bizarre. They are not bikes, they can be all sorts of contraptions allowed to be sold to them and then allowed to be sold to them and then they think that they know how to use them and most people do not take the highway code or the law and just use them and that a danger to themselves and also others who are road users at the same time and I would push and press the government to look at this in the other place.

They will look at whether there is some way in which selling these things to people without proper licenses are on display and that should be made illegal.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think that there is work to be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think that there is work to be done to make people aware of these. People do not realise that these are available and if they could buy them in legal shops, they do not realise they are doing anything wrong in the they are doing anything wrong in the first place. Will he agree that the public campaign would be welcome?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

public campaign would be welcome? I agree that it would be a good idea for people to know that what idea for people to know that what they are buying is legal and I suspect many do and if that understanding is backed up by a understanding is backed up by a penalty for the misuse of those and penalty for the misuse of those and selling them in shops, it would be a better way to deal with it because lots of kids do not know that and lots of kids do not know that and they can pay for these things and that is where the danger comes from.

We are shutting the door too late. They have got onto the roads, created an instant, killed created an instant, killed themselves. We have got to figure themselves. We have got to figure that out. The final bit of this is the fact that they can change the monitors inside the boxes, even on monitors inside the boxes, even on legal bikes and that is what we have legal bikes and that is what we have The main point is... It is not that great.

Who knows? I wheel that the motorcyclists have to be tested much more than car drivers. They have got to know everything because it is a more dangerous mode of transport. With all of that, you cannot buy a motorcycle in a shop and take it away unless you can show the licence and you are qualified to ride the bike and you need an instruction to do that. These can go and without anything and by the bikes, the electric vehicles.

It seems bizarre that should be allowed. We want people to use non-petrol, diesel, or the rest of it, because of the environment.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

On that point, is my honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

On that point, is my honourable friend aware of the campaign from Simon Cowell there he purchased an Simon Cowell there he purchased an electric bike, flipped over

**** Possible New Speaker ****

backwards and almost broke his back. It is a clear indication of how dangerous it can be. It is. These bikes can often

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It is. These bikes can often exhilarate very fast and you will exhilarate very fast and you will only experience that if you are used to riding something that moves quickly on two wheels because otherwise you will go out the back. You are not on a bike or motorcycle. Knowing that will take some Knowing that will take some instruction. The main point is that it is a good illustration of why we are being too casual about these are being too casual about these modes of transport and the young kids do not understand there should be exceptions and I think we should be exceptions and I think we should do more on this.

I will end on this.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

do more on this. I will end on this. He's been very generous with interventions. I support the amendment. The amendment includes amendment. The amendment includes the e-scooters because it is a real problem with them because they do not meet the criteria of the Highways Act they are banned and police will say that they are banned in the public areas and we have a real problem with that. People do not know it and we need the law to be more proactive, deliberate, and that is why this amendment is important.

Is there anything that he would like to add? We have a real problem with illegal usage.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I bow before my right honourable friend's greater knowledge on this matter and for this purpose, I would agree and I'm urging the government to take this away and look at this to take this away and look at this in the other place. I will not move the amendment because, for legal the amendment because, for legal rights, it is incorporated in the rights, it is incorporated in the amendment. It is the illegal bikes and the e-scooters that we need more and the e-scooters that we need more work on and my worry is that you can buy these things without any qualification whatsoever as a motorcyclist I have to demonstrate motorcyclist I have to demonstrate that I am qualified to radiate away that I am qualified to radiate away from the shop and you are not required to do so with e-bikes and e-scooters and so it is a e-scooters and so it is a peculiarity.

If you are asked in peculiarity. If you are asked in legislation, we follow through. This one not. I would charge them to look carefully at this to see if we can carefully at this to see if we can define it better in the other place and make sure shops cannot sell them and I will say that I will not be and I will say that I will not be moving this new clause because we are at the right place with the government.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I will speak to clauses 23, 24, 25 in my name. There are 25 in my name. There are restrictions on the delivery and pointed knives and heart attack and
14:43
Andy Slaughter Portrait Andy Slaughter MP (Hammersmith and Chiswick, Labour)
-
-
pointed knives and heart attack and the new clause is unnecessary and unlawful. This is to do with the role, Gypsy, Traveller community. -- Roma. I do not intend to press for a vote today but I look forward to the response as we progress. I support other amendments and new clause is and I've signed the new clause 19 in the name of my honourable friend and 155 and my honourable friend for Bolton rest and setting up an economic crime fighting fund and that was passed yesterday.

The second reading of the bill, I expressed a general concern that the necessary legislation affected the criminal justice system and were set out in the other bills and place an even greater strain on the system and I will not repeat what I said then but I hope the ministers from the Home Office are working together to ensure resources are in place to deal with the unintended consequences and the supply and one part of the criminal justice system causing demanded another.

More police numbers mean more arrests, prosecutions, convictions, and prosecutions, convictions, and incarcerations. Early release and alternatives to custody can create more work for probation and police.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Clauses 23 and 24, the purpose of these new clauses is to change the selling practice and manufacturers selling practice and manufacturers and retailers following this, to and retailers following this, to prevent the delivery of lethal pointed knives to domestic premises or remote locker collection points. or remote locker collection points. or remote locker collection points. Nothing prevents delivering them to chefs or butchers or a commercial chefs or butchers or a commercial enterprise that use pointed knives in business.

To prevent the display of pointed knives in shops but allow safer rounded knives to be delivered safer rounded knives to be delivered by courier or meal with minimum by courier or meal with minimum

**** Possible New Speaker ****

by courier or meal with minimum There are three key drivers. Home Office figures show there are two people killed by kitchen knives people killed by kitchen knives every week. In homicide cases where a pointed weapon is used, more than half of them were kitchen knives. Research from De Montfort University Research from De Montfort University showed that it is the pointed part that kills. The safe and rounded knives may injure but do not penetrate clothing, let alone arteries and vital organs.

We are approaching the one-year anniversary of the Southport killings. The Dunblane killings led to changes in the law on the sale of guns. The Southport anniversary should be the moment for knives. I welcome the amendment to the bill to impose age verification. But these amendments do not go far enough. What could and should be done, no reputable manufacturer or retailer would be prosecuted if these become law and it would make it easier for reputable retailers to mark it and sell as round kitchen knives.

A homeowner could still purchase a pointed knife by mail order. They would simply have to pick up and collect purchases in the store where there is more effective face to face age verification. This is a complex issue. There is no single, simple solution. These clauses would help solution. These clauses would help to reduce harm caused by knives, whether by criminal activity,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

accident or self-harm. On that point, I agree with my honourable friends's clause. In fact honourable friends's clause. In fact when I was a minister, we imposed when I was a minister, we imposed this question on having rounded knives. I'm glad to see the debate has moved forward. At that stage people almost thought it was comical this would help to solve the problem. So I do thank my noble

**** Possible New Speaker ****

problem. So I do thank my noble friend for the pursuit of this issue. I am very grateful to my honourable friends. It was regarded honourable friends. It was regarded as comical. But now Idris Elba is in as comical. But now Idris Elba is in favour and we have some experts across the field and I pay tribute to celebrities and to the victims to celebrities and to the victims and also the experts on legal, medical and psychological effects. medical and psychological effects.

They have suggested practical alternatives to reduce, obviously not eliminate but reduce the number not eliminate but reduce the number of deaths and serious injuries. With that I will turn to clause 25. It that I will turn to clause 25. It seeks to repeal additional police powers related to unauthorised encampments and it would introduce into the Public Order Act via the crime sentencing and Courts act of 2022. These powers were supported under the previous government. They are further punitive and hostile victimisation is of Romani, gypsy and Irish travellers who are among the most marginalised of groups

**** Possible New Speaker ****

within UK society. I thank the honourable gentleman

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable gentleman for giving way. I am clear that when it comes to travellers and minority groups, they absolutely do have rights but so too do they have responsibilities. When this law was responsibilities. When this law was put in place, there was a very good put in place, there was a very good reason. Does the right honourable gentleman agree with me that if he is to repeal this law, it leaves communities aren't protected against unauthorised traveller encampments which in areas such as my own became a game of cat and mouse with litter and worse left in our communities and worse left in our communities and the police would be left with no

**** Possible New Speaker ****

power to tackle it. I'm afraid that is the sort of nonsense I hear a lot of the time. Let me hear some of the measures Let me hear some of the measures which were in force before that. which were in force before that. Injunctions to protect unauthorised encampments. Licensing, possession orders, local authority powers to direct unauthorised encampments. direct unauthorised encampments. Addressing obstructions to public highways. Enforcement notifications. Breach of condition notices. The power of entry onto land.

How to direct unauthorised encampments to leave and police powers to direct trespasses to alternative sites. That was the provision before it came into effect. There are ample powers to deal with these issues and I am not going to give way again. I That is the sort of information that she peddles which I'm afraid it leaves us in the situation we are in. The constant threat of criminalisation of nomadic lifestyles has a devastating effect on families and that is why international bodies including the Council of Europe and the United Nations have raised concerns about the legality of these particular provisions.

It is these particular provisions that I am addressing. I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

give way. You have painted a complex legislated picture in relation to legislated picture in relation to this issue. Would you agree that there was a need for the legislation

**** Possible New Speaker ****

there was a need for the legislation in 2022 because all the acts you read out were working? I would say the powers are there and you had to put in the and you had to put in the implementation. I do take the measured way in which he puts measured way in which he puts forward his point. I think to counter what he has said, in May 2024, after the judicial review of 2024, after the judicial review of part four of the act, brought against the Home Office, the High Court issued a declaration of incompatibility with the human incompatibility with the human rights act.

The court found that certain provisions on the extension certain provisions on the extension of a ban or returning to a particular area for three months up particular area for three months up to 12 months constituted unjustified discrimination. Despite this, these discrimination. Despite this, these powers remain in force and while powers remain in force and while there is an incompatibility with our own laws it only relates to the provision so I put it to the Minister that all of part four could be scrapped without any detriment in enforcement under previous laws.

The police and local authorities do already have a whole spectrum of other powers which I have set out which they can and do use against encampments. If they are failing to do so then the question should be with them. But I also know that the police did not seek these powers. They were simply imposed upon them. The Crime and Policing Bill presents a perfect opportunity for the government to put this right by repealing part four of the act. Which allows the police to ban travellers from an area.

Arresting and finding them and even seizing homes. I will bring my remarks to a close there. I hope to bring some positive news today. But if my honourable friends wishes to discuss it further, I have excellent representative groups and we would be happy to engage in that discussion to see what can be made fair to nomadic and non-nomadic communities. That is all that is being asked for here. The law does not create a balance. It creates a bias at the moment.
14:54
Geoffrey Clifton-Brown Portrait Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP (North Cotswolds, Conservative)
-
-
I rise to speak in support of new clause 41 in my name and that of my honourable colleagues. It is a very simple amendment. It requires the Inspectorate of Constabulary and the Fire and Rescue Services to include firearms licensing as part of their obligations. I would like to declare an interest as the chair of the APPG for shooting and conservation and the firearm certificate holder that I am. I thank the Minister for attending our most recent meeting to answer questions, a range of questions and we were grateful for her time.

I share her commitment to protect public safety through sensible firearms laws and efficient licensing systems. It is not in the interests of the public or the shooting community for the wrong people to have guns. That is why I am moving this amendment. Members will be aware the licensing system in the UK is a press code -- postcode lottery. There is inconsistency in the application of the law and guidance and in services. They are endemic across the system. 25% of police forces are taking a year or more to process grants for a certificate with huge cost to the system.

In Gloucestershire, the foresight know best put out a statement saying that they were not accepting any new applications because of a lack of firearms training officers for two years. I intervened and I have to say they did act quickly and reversed this decision, setting up a command and I now get regular updates from the team. But this time weight is not good enough when the government is imposing a 133% increase in fees. An inefficient, ineffective licensing department endangers the public.

The inquest into the tragic Plymouth murders, the Devon and Cornwall Police firearms licensing department issued a certificate to the murderer, then removed his firearm certificate after he made an assault and then incredulously gave it back when he had done an anger management course. This was described as a chaotic shambles which could not operate in its own risk matrix. It identified the murderer as low risk when in actual fact he was high risk and should never have received his certificate back again.

I appreciate the Minister made reassurances about the licensing department and information is being made available to the public on the waiting time for renewals and new applications but it does not go far enough to ensure police forces take inefficiencies seriously and put a plan in place to improve departments across England and Wales. This stands for police effectiveness efficiency and legitimacy and it takes place every year. So for every takes place every year. So for every police force in England and Wales, inspections include themes such as treating the public fairly, responding to the public and resources and value for money.

Firearms licences comes under all three categories and yet there is no mention of it in any previously public inspection. I know the Minister has assured us that all funding received for cost and recovery of firearms licensing will be ring fenced for improving licensing departments and yet this is not guaranteed. We have written to all forces when the increase in licences were imposed recently, seeking assurances that funding would go to licensing and to date only 33% of the Constabulary have given that assurance.

Insisting that the inclusion of firearms licensing inspections is a powerful way to ensure police forces are publicly accountable and funded properly and run efficiently for the benefit of public safety is a sensible, proportional and probing amendment which I hope the Minister might feel able to accept if it were to be Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I speak in support of my new clause
15:00
Bell Ribeiro-Addy Portrait Bell Ribeiro-Addy MP (Clapham and Brixton Hill, Labour)
-
-
107 which stands in my name and to lend support to other vital amendments, particularly related to protest rights, joint enterprise, facial recognition and predictive facial recognition and predictive policing technology. I will begin with my new clause which would require the Home Secretary to publish impact assessments within 12 months of this bill becoming law. I do acknowledge the initial Equality do acknowledge the initial Equality Impact Assessment's but I must stress that these initial assessments are not a substitute for a thorough ongoing review of how these powers will be used and who these powers will be used and who these powers will be used and who they will affect.

This bill touches every part of the criminal justice system. Police powers, sentencing, surveillance and if we know anything from decades of experience, such legislation rarely lands equally. We know black men are disproportionately stopped and searched. Muslim communities are targeted by counterterrorism laws. Ethnic minorities face under Ethnic minorities face under protection and systemic mistrust. We must also talk frankly about how the system fails women. Particularly in the context of violence against the context of violence against women and girls. While the state has women and girls.

While the state has found countless new ways to expand police powers and increase maximum sentences, we are yet to find the will to use them to properly protect women. Not when women who report domestic abuse and sexual violence are ignored and when black and working class people who support violence are dismissed. Not when rape is effectively decriminalised with cases rarely getting to court. Let's not forget the cases which shocked the nation and the report Misogyny within police ranks and institutional discrimination and the failures of some forces still do not admit exist.

We have a lot of work to do to rebuild trust between the police and the community. That is why this clause matters. If we are going to hand over more power to the police and the state, we also need to demand more accountability and transparency. We have to ask what it means for women, survivors and marginalised communities. An impact assessment will help make sure this has understands the real-world effects of the laws passed particularly on women and girls and on those who have experienced inequality of race, class and inequality of race, class and I want to voice my continued support for amendments relating to joint enterprise.

Too many young people, disproportionately joint black men, have been convicted under joint enterprise for being present and not for committing the crime but being in the wrong place, with the wrong people, at the wrong time. Sometimes this place just happens to be where they live and this relies on racist assumptions about gang affiliation, collective guilt, and despite repeated warnings from campaigners and senior judges, nothing has changed and that is why it's important to review and correct any further injustices. I want to end by reaffirming support for clause 50, which supports the fundamental right to process and the potential infringement of protest in the bill over all.

Protest is not a nuisance but a vital part of democracy and there is the Suffragettes the man in the vote, trade unionists for fair pay, Black Rates -- Black Lives Matter. I am here because of the protest of those who came before me and any legislation which seeks to silence dissent or criminalises those who dare to challenge power is wrong. The struggles are a mark of progress tomorrow. We must not continue the legacy of the previous government. Our job as lawmakers is to protect the People's rights, not repress them.

I want to reiterate my concern about provisions in the bill related to facial recognition, AI, and predictive policing and these are addressed in the clauses for the members from the Brighton Pavilion. They are based on biased data, deployed unbiased ways, and have a thread to civil liberties. Faecal recognition has been shown to be less accurate in identifying black and brown faces. It is being used to justify further as violence in these committees.

This is automated justice and the part without upper guard rails, there will be issues with technologies which infringe discriminations in ways we do not yet understand that that which those affected will feel for years to affected will feel for years to come. The role of the House is not just to pass laws but to make sure that they are just, impacts of, and would affect values of equality and accountability. That means demanding better protections for women and girls in the face of state and police failure, defending the right to protest, ending illegal doctrines like joint enterprise which sweep up the innocent with the guilty, which means putting strict safeguards on surveillance technologies which are disproportionately harming marginalised communities and that would mean putting in place something like the new clause 107 to make sure we can properly assess and monitor the real effects of how powers in the House are affecting the most marginalised in our

**** Possible New Speaker ****

community. An immediate time limit of five minutes.
15:05
Louie French Portrait Mr Louie French MP (Old Bexley and Sidcup, Conservative)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

minutes. I rise to speak in favour of the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise to speak in favour of the new clause 130 to strengthen rules with regard to tool that. In May, I with regard to tool that. In May, I joined police officers in a raid to uncover stolen tools at a boot sale in London. The unlicensed boot sales are notorious for stolen goods. I was astounded. Officers arrived and police cars and unmarked cars and there was a flurry of action with stolen goods, a van trying to flee, and keys to vehicles suddenly lost.

Police struck quickly and the numbers and the stolen tools were uncovered and six arrests were made and eventually the officers struck another mode with a van overflowing with stolen tools. Came to a second site. 160 stolen tools were found worth around £500,000. Officers returned some marks tools to owners. This shows why tradespeople must mark the tools properly and if they have DNA tagging, police can show they are responsible and return the goods.

Marking the tools alone will not stop the dual theft. Vans are being broken into in broad daylight and tools sold openly across the country. It is a disgrace. The law must change to promise those responsible and crackdown on the Brit seals driving this wave across the country. I encourage all members to support the amendment tabled by my honourable friend, the new clause 130. It will increase fines to better match the severity of the crime, reflecting the cost of replacing tools and repairing damage to vans and lost work.

Secondly...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am grateful to the honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am grateful to the honourable gentleman for a giving way. Does he agree that by accepting the amendment, it would be one way the government could help in terms of reaching out to businesses and traders ensuring we are on the side of local businesses and people who give it every morning and there are issues with this and these tools are

**** Possible New Speaker ****

issues with this and these tools are key for people to do their jobs. We must back the makers, not the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We must back the makers, not the lawmakers and put that is the van men, rural farmers have until stolen, the impact is significant and the ability to go to work and on families and the ability to buy families and the ability to buy food. We must back the makers, not the lawbreakers. It will impose the lawbreakers. It will impose tougher sentences on these by recognising the seriousness of the recognising the seriousness of the crime. Finally, it would require councils to create an enforcement plan to stop the sale of stolen plan to stop the sale of stolen goods and Brit seals.

These are necessary changes to stop dual theft across the country. Tradespeople and industry cannot afford parliamentary delay. Campaigners, tradespeople, experts in the industry have told us that action is needed now. Every 12 minutes, a van is broken into and the despair. It costs thousands of pounds and hopes people's mental health and stops them from earning a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

living. Does my honourable friend agree

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Does my honourable friend agree that it is not just theft from a van but this is actually people's whole but this is actually people's whole livelihoods and their ability to work and it can shut down a business. Does he agree that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

business. Does he agree that therefore it is worthy of being its own friend? I thank him for the vital

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank him for the vital contribution. Coming onto the larger impact, we often think about small businesses and there is value and businesses and there is value and goods at the roundtable and saw goods at the roundtable and saw Openreach fans are fed three times a Openreach fans are fed three times a day on average and this delays the fatal blow. This was stolen and just three months and it has impacted it and if any MPs are unsure of the and if any MPs are unsure of the need to act now, they must speak to need to act now, they must speak to Frankie Williams, local police, and Frankie Williams, local police, and the teams only tools who have worked tirelessly on this issue and I thank them all, especially the teams

**** Possible New Speaker ****

leaving the hard work around the country. I thank him for a giving way. It

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank him for a giving way. It speech. We also acknowledge my constituent who runs a podcast for tradespeople and brought this issue to my attention.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to my attention. I thank him for that contribution. I applaud all efforts contribution. I applaud all efforts of people making podcast, tradespeople going online, sharing experiences, and any member can look experiences, and any member can look experiences, and any member can look them up and you will see cases every single day of people having their tools stolen and the damage that it tools stolen and the damage that it is doing to financial and mental health and the impact it has on the wider economy is so severe we must act now, Parliament must act to act now, Parliament must act to act now, Parliament must act to change the law today, I would hope.

I hope some of the PCCs that are getting stuck in and I piloted getting stuck in and I piloted examples of police forces in Sidcup and heaving in particular and and heaving in particular and colleagues in Kent and Sussex are doing great work to tackle this issue. I've highlighted that this is not party political and I appreciate not party political and I appreciate the work of the honourable member the work of the honourable member for Portsmouth north on shining a spotlight on this and we can work across parties to get this changed and I hope in all sincerity that all MPs get behind this amendment and that the government can help us to change the law and get on the side of the makers and tackle the lawbreakers.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise in support of the new clause 13 in my name and clause 15
15:11
Kim Johnson Portrait Kim Johnson MP (Liverpool Riverside, Labour)
-
-
in the name of my honourable friend. It proposes to change the law on joint enterprise and for those who do not know, this is centuries-old and allows people to be convicted of a crime, murder or manslaughter, even if one person was not involved. This disproportionately impacts black people with young black men 16 more times to be convicted under joint enterprise than their white counterparts. I would like to thank all of those people who supported by Private Members' Bill that had its second reading in February, 2024, and for the continued support for the campaign, particularly joint enterprise, not guilty by association.

That is the result of a judicial review brought upon them and there was a pilot survey of joint enterprise cases, resulting in access to accurate data and highlighting the racial disparities that exist. The case law was reversed by the Supreme Court ruling in 2016 and it was identified in terms of how the law had taken a wrong turn for 30 years and the Law Commission are undertaking a review of homicide and the sentencing three from murder and will examine the law in light of this court ruling and campaigners are anticipating clear solutions on the disparities and inequality.

I understand the government has reservations about my amendment it is clear there is recognition across the House that the joint enterprise must be fixed. The prosecution is flawed and ritualised. The Supreme Court ruling of 2016 did not resolve the key problems with the law. Speculative prosecution theories are accepted in place of strong evidence which allows and encourages racist stereotypes and using gang narratives to imply collective intent, using taste in music as evidence of being in a gang and police being called as expert witnesses.

We are making significant inroads and proposing a new bill to deal with this and also removing artistic expression from criminal summaries. We will produce a report for the government in 2036. The reform of joint enterprise is long overdue. It has gone as long as it can and it is now for Parliament. These are the words of the former DPP, now the Prime Minister, "Madam Deputy Speaker, I return to new clause 50 which seeks to update protesting law.

The purpose is to keep public authority powers proportionate and to uphold the right in society to protest peacefully as a fundamental pillar of free and equal democracy. The right to protest and the freedom to protest goes back centuries and is championed across the political spectrum, from the peasants revolt to the suffragettes. We celebrate the great British tradition of direct action. Many freedoms have been won this week including workers rights. Most recently, we've seen farmers protesting outside Parliament and mass trespass in defence of the right to roam, to strike at workers, anti-protesters and beyond.

Millions of much peacefully against the genocide in Gaza and thousands of disabled people have protested against proposed welfare disabled benefit changes. We have seen protesters outside parliament against the assisted dying Bill and pro-life testers outside this place yesterday. The ability to protest and the freedom of expression and assembly are protected by Article 10 and 11 on the convention of human rights and enshrined in UK law. The plant demonstrated outside BBC headquarters in January demanded impartial coverage of the war in Gaza and was banned by police on the Bay City headquarters are in close proximity to a synagogue and this was after weeks of agreement of the route with the police.

This is a serious infringement of our right and we cannot protest outside the headquarters of public broadcasters, what does that say about our democracy? There should be concern for all who believe in democracy and free society. The government of the chance to change the course and rollback on these clampdowns and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise in support of new clause
15:16
Mike Martin Portrait Mike Martin MP (Tunbridge Wells, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
43 in my name and the honourable member for Walthamstow and the chair of the Select Committee who I thank for their support. It is also signed by 100 members from across the house, representing the entire political spectrum, almost every party, including many members of the Labour Party. This seeks to do something very simple, to commence an act of Parliament, the Protection from Sex-based Harassment in Public Bill act of 2023, which has already gained Royal assent and this simply criminalises the harassment of people in public based on their sex but this is a crime that overwhelmingly affects women.

So this is really about the criminalisation of harassment of people in public. The act started life as a private members' bill. Laid by my predecessor Greg Clark. He was approached by 1/6 former in our constituency, who said she had been harassed while coming home from school. 33% of schoolgirls say they have been harassed in their school uniforms in the United Kingdom. We should be ashamed of that statistic. Greg was ashamed. He took action. The 2023 act as was past creates a specific offence of harassment on account of somebody's gender.

Like this amendment that I have written in support, it did have cross-party support. Including it must be said from the Member for Birmingham Yardley, now the Minister for safeguarding. The act criminalises harassing following shouting degrading comments, making obscene gestures with the deliberate intent to cause harm or distress and it carries a sentence of a maximum of two years. I am quite disappointed and confused with the interactions I have had with the government on this issue. Every time I have pressed the government for an update on the commencement, I have not really received answers that are substantial.

Eight months ago I asked a question in this House and got a letter from the government saying the Home Office is making all the necessary arrangements and I would be contacted when a commencement date is confirmed. As a new MP I thought that was quite promising. Five months ago I tabled a written question and the response was it would publish next steps at the earliest opportunity. Okay. Two weeks ago I got a reply from the government to a further communication stating that an update on commencement would be provided in due course.

Each communication I have received from the government is a little bit more vague. A little bit less definitive about commencement. So yesterday at her request I met with the Minister at her instigation and I thought it was fantastic. Finally we will get some answers but there was nothing, I'm afraid. Nothing. I asked this Minister, not that minister, and I also point to a meeting at the is not going to say anything new to what was previously said. I give

**** Possible New Speaker ****

way. I am proud to put my name to new

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am proud to put my name to new clause 43 in the honourable member's name. I pay tribute to him for the way in which he has taken Greg way in which he has taken Greg Clark's previous work in a cross- party way for the benefit of the community, going forward. Does he community, going forward. Does he share my frustration and slight bewilderment at the way in which the government appears to be blocking commencement?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank him for his intervention. What I would say in the defence of the government is that I do not think it is a difference in policy. think it is a difference in policy. I think it is a difference in timing. But the timing seems to be very elastic and what we see Kai think here and maybe the Minister think here and maybe the Minister could respond is a definitive time for when the act will be commenced.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

for when the act will be commenced. I thank my honourable friend for giving way. As somebody who was very proud having been working for many proud having been working for many years to recognise misogyny within the hate crime framework, to work with his predecessor on this legislation, it will be two years in September since this House on a cross-party basis agreed to this legislation. Two years that the work has in theory been done to commence Many of us on this side are proud of our commitment to recognising misogyny in hate crime and I wonder if he will join with me in saying that we want to understand what the barriers might be to getting on with the job which across the House we know will keep women and girls safer

**** Possible New Speaker ****

on our streets. I thank the honourable lady for her intervention. I can actually her intervention. I can actually give her a specific time. It is 21 months to the day since this act months to the day since this act received Royal assent. I think perhaps what we might have from the Minister if she would be so gracious is either a time for commencement, is either a time for commencement, or as the honourable member says, a specific problem stopping the act specific problem stopping the act from being commenced rather than some of the more general responses some of the more general responses we have had to date so far.

I will conclude now. I am doubly disappointed that this act, though passed in a previous Parliament, passed in a previous Parliament, expressing the unanimous will of Parliament, passed without division, it is also entirely commensurate with the Labour government's policy to halve violence against women and girls. Harassment and violence are girls. Harassment and violence are on a continued spectrum and one of the things we are trying to do here the things we are trying to do here is change the culture of men towards how they act towards women.

This act is part of that. I think it really contributes to the government's priorities and manifesto. Indeed the Minister sat on the Public Bill Committee for this act in 2023 and said the Labour Party would work with the then Conservative government to make sure the bill passes without division and so it did. Therefore I would ask, and the government has signalled that it is going to vote against this amendment when it has been selected for a vote tonight and may vote against it, so I ask why when the amendment has cross-party support, the original act had unanimous cross-party support, why would the government vote against this amendment? It seems to me they are voting against their own manifesto and commitments while in opposition.

It is difficult to understand. Because I think we all want the same thing. So I will conclude that implementing the protection from sex-based harassment is an important step in helping the government achieve its own manifesto commitments. Let this not be another speech without action. I urge honourable and right honourable members to vote for new clause 43.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I speak to talk to new clause 47 in I speak to talk to new clause 47 in my name. It is a very simple clause my name. It is a very simple clause in a way. How do we stop mobile
15:24
15:26
Caroline Dinenage Portrait Dame Caroline Dinenage MP (Gosport, Conservative)
-
-
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker and I rise to speak to new clause 121, tabled in my name and supported by the Member for Rutland and Stamford and supported I'm pleased to say by members from all sides of the chamber. It extends the definition of extreme pornography to include depicting non-fatal strangulation. This was made a criminal offence in 2021 by the last government, not because we think the government should necessarily stick In their own room but because abusers use non-fatal strangulation without consent because it leaves a visible injury and makes it hard to prosecute under domestic abuse cases.

When a woman died from strangulation it is becoming increasingly common to use this as a defence that it was a sex game gone wrong. Non-fatal strangulation has a life out there in the world of online pornography. The UK as we know is a large consumer and in any given month more than 10 million adults in the UK will access online pornography and the majority of them will be male, that is up to them, we do not charge but we know that this Widespread that 10% of children will have seen it by the age of nine.

Unfortunately it is the guide that many young people used to learn about sex. That is why I am worried non-fatal strangulation has been fined to be rife on pornographic websites. It is influencing behaviour of young men who are non- consensually strangling young women during sexual intercourse. Polling has suggested 70% of 16-34 year old had been strangled without giving had been strangled without giving consent during consensual sex. We are calling for this misogynistic act to be banned in online Experts are warning there is no way to strangle somebody without risk given that blood and airflow may both be restricted.

A person can become unconscious within 10 seconds of being choked and within 70 seconds they could have a seizure due to lack of oxygen and death could occur within 150 seconds of being rendered unconscious. Almost 20% of the women killed in the UK since 2014 were strangled by an intimate partner. Perpetrators who choke partners are seven times more likely to kill them. It is alarming and I'm sure the Minister will agree that it is alarming to hear reports of young men seeking advice on how they can safely strangle their partner in bed or that girls are expected to settle for this kind of behaviour.

A report last year which the Minister might have heard was of a draft guidance from a local Changing for a sex education class. Strangling your partner in bed is not safe. It can be a precursor to coercive, abusive behaviour. The government would like to send the signal as well because in February they said in response to an independent review commissioned by the previous government, it said the government would take urgent action to make sure pornography platforms, law enforcement and prosecutors take all necessary steps to tackle this increasingly prevalent harm stop I urge the Minister today to support this clause, 121.

It is one of the necessary steps that was referred to in the response and we need to back the amendment, ban this practice, and send out the strong message that depicting non-fatal strangulation in pornography normalises something

**** Possible New Speaker ****

safe. I rise to speak to new clause 155

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise to speak to new clause 155 in the name of my honourable friend the Member for Bolton West and supported by the APPG on Down
15:30
Joe Powell Portrait Joe Powell MP (Kensington and Bayswater, Labour)
-
-
supported by the APPG on Down syndrome. I welcome the bill for its clear strategy to tackle antisocial behaviour and crime stop if we want Safer Streets we must step up efforts to tackle financial and economic crime and that is what this amendment is aiming to do, supported by at least 30 members on all sides of the House. This is now the most commonly experienced crime in the UK, accounting for more than 40% of reported incidents and yet we invest 0.05% of GDP in enforcement which is not sustainable.

These crimes are not without victims. They erode public trust. Exploit financial institutions. Hollow out high streets and communities. In my constituency of Kensington Bayswater, from Earls Court Rd down to Queensway, Notting Hill Gate, Portobello Road, residents and business owners are fed up with the proliferation of cash intensive businesses such as low-grade souvenir shops, and barbershops and these are more than just eyesores. I hear persistent concerns about the VAT evasion and even troubling links to serious organised and money laundering.

I was encouraged by a crackdown on barbershops suspected of laundering criminal funding earlier this year. I take this opportunity to put on record my thanks to the leadership of this operation, the serious fraud office and front rank staff for engaging closely with the APPG. They are doing excellent work but they cannot tackle this alone. We need proper cross government coordination and cross government coordination and New clause 155 would require the government to assassinate economic crime fighting fund. This would be a pulled fund financed by a share of the assets already recovered through enforcement.

That is confiscation, fines and prosecution agreements. It is not new money but money recovered by our enforcement agencies but currently returned to the Treasury and often left and spent due to outdated annual rules. In 2022, the NCA had to return £15 million of recovered criminal assets because it can spend them fast enough. This is inefficient and perverse. The fund would create a virtuous cycle, more enforcement, more recovery and greater deterrence. The SFO returns 3 pounds for every 1 pound invested.

So, this is smart economics and a compelling argument for long-term sustainable resourcing. With the financial action task Force on the horizon, the UK needs to demonstrate that it has the financial and technical capacity to take this issue seriously, otherwise we risk falling behind our global partners in the fight against corruption and illicit finance. So, I look forward to the forthcoming publication of the governance anticorruption strategy and I value the opportunity to work closely with the anticorruption champion Baroness Hodge in shaping this.

The Foreign Secretary is also rights to make it his mission to position the UK as the global capital of anticorruption and the commitment to a summit on financial crime next year. So, that ambition is clear, but we now must match it with resources, coordination, and reform. I would like to briefly highlight an area where this bill makes a real difference on end C5 which was referenced by the honourable memo for Chingford and Woodford Green. Many residents in Kensington and Bayswater have contacted me about the dangerous and antisocial use of illegally modified E bikes, especially by delivery drivers which include speeding, reckless pavement riding an off-road use.

I am a cyclist, not a motorcyclist, and I support active travel and safe cycling, but what we are seeing is dangerous and residents have had enough. So I'm really glad that this bill gives the police the power to act, to seize and destroy illegally modified bikes within 48-hour is building on powers already in place in the police format, and I thank the Minister for confirmation to me recently that delivery E bikes will be covered under these new provisions and for taking into account the concerns of my community.

I hope the Minister will look kindly on our request for support for sustainably funding the fight against economic crime.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I rise to speak in support of LibDem new clauses 83, 84, 85 and 86 which have been tabled 84, 85 and 86 which have been tabled in the rise of my honourable friend for Hazel Grove. I also commend my for Hazel Grove. I also commend my gallant friend from Tunbridge Wells
15:35
Ben Maguire Portrait Ben Maguire MP (North Cornwall, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
gallant friend from Tunbridge Wells on his new clause 43. Presenting one of the most rural constituencies in the UK, I know just how deeply Rural Crime Bill fax my constituents lives and livelihoods and I'm not talking just about the occasional petty theft of property. The problem we face is calculated, organised crime, and it is devastating north because farmers, small businesses, and entire communities in our rural areas. Take the farmer who lost over £3000 worth of tools and equipment in a single night.

Although farming couple who had to have their quad bike stolen worth £15,000. In this case, the police didn't even arrive until three days later and to this day, the couple haven't heard anything more. Not to blame our hard-working consuls who are stretched to breaking point. It's no wonder that 86% of countryside residents say Rural Crime Bill is harming their mental well-being and these are not isolated incidents. They are part of a growing pattern, one that successive governments have allowed to thrive under their watch.

That's why NCAT three would finally extend the equipment theft prevention act 2023 to cover GPS units which currently are the most commonly spent pieces of farm tech. NCAT/dedicated rural time cask force can, something we on these benches have long campaigned for working in Scotland and working in a handful of regional police forces so it is time that the government develop and roll out a properly funded and equipped task force nationwide. I'm pleased that, after years of pressure from myself and my LibDem colleagues, the government has now finally announced they will be committing to a full rural crimes strategy and I hope the Minister can update this house on the timing of that.

But strategy alone won't stop theft. It must come with proper enforcement. That is why NCAT five and NCAT six matter. They would guarantee minimal levels of policing and ensure every local authority area has offices exclusively dedicated to community- based work. In Cornwall, the police are doing all they can but when the force gets left money per head than anywhere else in England, it is not enough. Offices are overstretched and underfunded. We need boots on the ground with officers to understand the rural landscapes they are serving.

That is why I urge the house to back these amendments. For the tradesmen who lost their tools, the farmers who have lost their machinery and vehicles, and for every rural community that has lost faith that justice will ever be done. Separate clauses 87 and 88 which would make it a criminal offence for water companies to breach pollution commitments, and hold senior executives personally liable for their failures. In North Cornwall, my constituents living with the consequences of systematic pollution for profit.

In 2024, south-west water issue more than 3000 sewage alerts in its region including 540 during the official bathing season, and a staggering 2600 outside of it. This is a routine and quite preventable environmental harm. South-west water pleasure significant real juice it sewage discharges, but freedom information request show that they have increased their discharges by a shocking five times last year versus the previous year. And the human cost of this is real. In with myth Bay, my constituent became L after playing on the beach.

A friend's child suffered similar symptoms and I was contacting one of my surgeries a few weeks ago by teenage girls surfing in Harlan Bay who required hospital admission. I dealt with residents reporting brown water coming from the tap. The results of cracks that bear down reservoir due to the lack of maintenance. Many have no water for days and the compensation from south-west water, £50 per household. And yet the leadership behind these constant and shocking failures continue to be rewarded.

The Chief Executive of the group who own south-west water was group who own south-west water was paid a total of £860,000 in 2024, a small increase of 300,000 from the year before. Our beaches, rivers and families are being failed and let down, especially by the last Conservative government, and now by this government which is why these new clauses offer a clear message.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. On 30 April 1999, three nail bombs went off in London three nail bombs went off in London killing four and injuring 140. One killing four and injuring 140. One of them exploded at brick Lane, the hub of London's Bengali community. One of them exploded in Soho at the One of them exploded in Soho at the Adml Duncan pub, the heart of London's gay district, and one of them exploded in Brixton, an attack
15:40
Rachel Taylor Portrait Rachel Taylor MP (North Warwickshire and Bedworth, Labour)
-
-
them exploded in Brixton, an attack on South London's black community. The Sikh terrorist who committed these evil acts was motivated by hatred. He hated Bengalis and black people because of their race and hated LGBT people because of who they love and how they live their lives. He hated these groups because they were different from him. He hated them because of who they are. I raise this appalling incident to remind this house that hatred comes remind this house that hatred comes in many forms but that whoever in our society it is against, we must all stand as strongly against it.

We must have hate crime laws that show that whatever it is your race or religion, your sexual orientation or your gender identity or your disability, that Britain is a country that will not tolerate it. That all hatred is equal, that all who commit vile acts of hatred will face the same grave consequences. But I regret to say that is not currently the case. Today, the law recognises five categories of hate crime, race, religion, sexual orientation, transgender identity and disability, but only two, race and religion are treated as aggravated offences with stronger sentencing powers.

The other three are not. That discrepancy cannot be right. We cannot as a society say that some forms of hatred are more evil than others. I was at university when section 28 was released. I remember it vividly. It was more than the law but an attack on the right of people like me to live openly. It stigmatised lesbians, gays and bisexual people and pushed us out of public life. I got into politics to fight that law, and everything it represented.

Hate corrodes our entire society. It doesn't just harm the individuals who are targeted but creates fear to go outside, to speak up, to be seen. It silences people and makes us all afraid. Research by Stonewall found that less than half of LGBT people feel safe holding their partner's hand in public. That is the impact of the fear of hatred having on people. It makes them afraid to even show the world that they exist. Unfortunately, far too many recorded crimes are never charged.

11,000 disability hate crimes recorded by police, 320 prosecuted. 22,000 homophobic hate crimes, 3118 prosecuted. 4000 hate crimes against transgender people, only 137 prosecuted. Behind the statistics is a real person who scars may heal on the outside but who may never recover from the fear and trauma that they have suffered. In 2024, a teenage far right extremist was jailed for targeting and attacking a transgender woman along with another young man, they kicked out of the ground in a park in Swansea and held transphobic abuse at her.

In 2022, Cassie, a PhD student and wheelchair user, was waiting outside a shop went to drunk man grabbed her wheelchair, pushed her down the road and made sexual comments. She had to escape by rolling into traffic. We must face this hatred and make sure we show that we will not stick with the status quo. The victims of these attacks deserve to live in a society that says we take this hatred seriously and we will not stand for it.

Victims must be at the heart of our criminal justice system. We must make sure that laws protect them. That is why my amendment is so important. LGBT and disabled people tell me that they don't feel safe, not like they used to. We are seeing rising transphobia everywhere, pride flags taken down at county halls, some politicians openly questioning whether disabilities are even real. I'm proud that in our manifesto, Labour committed to equalising our hate crime laws by making hate crimes against LGBT people and disabled people aggravated offences.

I'm proud to be bringing forward that change through this amendment today. I hope I can encourage all my parliamentary colleagues to support new clause 122 today and make this important step forward for equal rights. I thank my honourable friends, the member for Burton and Uttoxeter and for Penistone and Stockbridge for standing shoulder to shoulder with me throughout this process. I urge you to support this process. I urge you to support this
15:45
15:46
15:46
Peter Bedford Portrait Mr Peter Bedford MP (Mid Leicestershire, Conservative)
-
-
clause 51 and speak in support today. In November 2022 she had gone into labour with her youngest child. into labour with her youngest child. Mother and child were OK, when she received a call that her parents had been tragically killed in a car been tragically killed in a car crash. The driver of the other vehicle had no licence and was uninsured. On what was supposed to be one of the happiest days of be one of the happiest days of Emma's life, she instead had to identify the bodies of her parents, identify the bodies of her parents, Ian and Gail.

When the case came to court, the driver of the other vehicle was charged with the lesser vehicle was charged with the lesser offence of causing death by careless driving rather than by dangerous driving rather than by dangerous driving. This reduced the sentence available to the courts, even though available to the courts, even though he was swerving in and out of traffic, and drove without a licence being insured. I put it to this being insured. I put it to this House that despite very nature is dangerous.

Since this verdict, Emma dangerous. Since this verdict, Emma has been fighting, not for vengeance, but to make sure that no vengeance, but to make sure that no other family has to suffer the injustice that she has. Justice not just for her parents but for other just for her parents but for other people who face the same heartbreak. She is calling for a simple but vital change. Any driver who kills while driving without a licence or insurance should automatically face the more serious offence of causing death by dangerous driving.

Today I want to say to Emma directly when I was watching, I fundamentally agree with you. Your dedication to the cause is commendable, you are doing your late parents proud. We know that road accidents happen. When someone wilfully gets behind the wheel of a car, unlicensed, and uninsured, swerving in and out of vehicles, it is not an accident, but a dangerous choice to put the lives of others at risk. This new clause would rightly treat such behaviour as seriously as it is, and as serious as driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

It will close a loophole in the current law and bring greater justice to victims. If this amendment does not progress today, can I ask the government minister to meet with myself and Emma to ensure that her campaign continues.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I rise to speak in support of new
15:48
Mary Kelly Foy Portrait Mary Kelly Foy MP (City of Durham, Labour)
-
-
rise to speak in support of new clause 25 in the name of my honourable friend for Hammersmith and Chiswick, which seeks to repeal unnecessary and arbitrary police powers introduced via the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022. Which introduced a new criminal offence with the power to seize the homes of gypsy and travel of families, to find, rest, and in prison. The powers contained within part four of the act of had a devastating impact on gypsy and Iris Traveller communities.

And on a culture that is not only centuries- old but also protected by law. The government has a legal and moral duty to facilitate this way of life, not to legislate it out of existence. As we heard earlier from my honourable Friend, in May 2024, the High Court found certain provisions in part four of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act to be incompatible with the Human Rights Act. Which the government have so far failed to meaningfully respond to, let alone meaningfully respond to, let alone correct.

In issuing the declaration of incompatibility, the High Court recognised the lack of transit provisions across England on which gypsy and traveller families can stop. And the subsequent impact that these powers have on gypsy and travel of families. If there is any doubt in people's minds as to the state of transit provision in England, I refer to the research published by friends, families, and travellers this year, which found that 90% of the 362 local authorities have no transit provision at all.

Notably, the introduction of the powers has a chilling effect on communities fears of being targeted and sanctioned. I will share the words of someone from the community who has been directly impacted by these powers, which highlight the human consequences of these laws. This law adds to the knock-on effects we face daily, with access to healthcare and education. Being moved on constantly has been detrimental to my health. As sometimes I have to drive over 100 miles to see a GP, I could be made a criminal and lose my home.

All because I have never known any different. " It is painfully obvious that what we need to do is not criminal sanctions for those families who have nowhere to stop. The answer is of course to create laws which ensure there are enough places for people to stop which I might add the Planning and Infrastructure Bill provides the perfect opportunity. As I stand here today during Gypsy, Roma and Traveller history month, I urge the government not to delay further.

Let us repeal part four of the PCSCA through this Crime and Policing Bill, and take a meaningful step towards justice, inclusion, and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

respect for all communities. Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to start wiping tribute would like to start wiping tribute to someone who is in the gallery today and has been campaigning for a today and has been campaigning for a change in the law during the 12 month limitation period for historic
15:51
Liz Jarvis Portrait Liz Jarvis MP (Eastleigh, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
month limitation period for historic cases of rape for 15 year old girls when they occurred before 2004. It can take years for victims of abuse to come forward. Baroness Kennedy tailored amendments to the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act bill in the other place which sought to close this loophole. But they were not taken forward by the previous government. That is why I have tabled new clause 160. I hope all survivors of this terrible crime will get the closure and justice they deserve.

I am supporting several amendments today including amendment nine, tabled by the honourable member of Rotherham. I recently met with a constituent who is ex-partner was convicted of sexual communication with a child and put on the sex offenders register. He was then allowed to changes name. Understandably my constituent was horrified to learn that he could take on a new identity and other women might not be aware. This amendment will stop defendants avoiding measures which are important for public safety. As well as assuring victims that perpetrators cannot dodge the consequences of their actions.

I'm also supporting clauses 85 to 88, new clause 121 and 122. In addition I support new clause 120 tabled by my honourable friend member for Esher and Walton, it will strengthen protections for emergency workers by addressing eight motivated offences committed in private dwellings was done no one doing their job to protect others should face abuse. Whether on the street or in someone's home, hate fuelled tax on those who serve the public must be prosecuted with the seriousness they warrant.

Finally, I'd like to thank my honourable friend, the member for Tunbridge Wells, for tabling clause 43 it would ensure the government implements the sex-based harassment public act 2023. No one should have to put up with sexual harassment and this change in the law is long overdue.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I rise to speak to amendments 103, 104, and 105. I would like to thank
15:54
Jess Asato Portrait Jess Asato MP (Lowestoft, Labour)
-
-
104, and 105. I would like to thank my honourable friend the member for Pontypridd for engagement on issues I'm about to discuss. I will also pay tribute to the APPG on commercial sexual exportation, to cease all exportation and to Barnado's for their support in Tackling Violence Against Women and children. My amendments reflect the recommendations of a thorough recent review conducted by a noble Baroness into online pornography. I am so proud that this Labour government has made equipment to Har violence against women and girls.

I truly believe that regulating violent online pornography which is viewed by nearly 40% of men once a week in the UK will make a clear impact on that commitment. As the honourable member for Gosport has already argued, sexual strangulation is one of the most frequently found acts across all categories on mainstream pornography sites. Despite its dangers, it is portrayed as a safe and normal part of sex. In a Google search, a company founded 30 million videos immediately for choking porn. The story of Hannah is that she met her killer, James Norton, on the day she died.

He was reported as being obsessed with strangulation, frequently watching porn featuring strangulation of women. Although the judge said he had strangled Hannah without warning or permission, he claimed he began to lightly strangle her before more forcefully strangling her. Women and girls paying the price of both the industry that seeks to profit from the most violent kinds of content, as well as laws that are not fit for purpose. Despite the clear evidence of a direct connection between viewing's regulation content in pornography and undertaking such acts, the law will only intervene in the removal of this type of pornographic content if the threshold of life threatening is clearly met.

My amendment NC102 would ban pornographic content with any stagnation. It would place a duty on platforms to remove regulation videos or face action. It is clear that we need stronger regulation. Off-line, we have been regulating pornographic content since 1984, which specifically limits off-line content to the British Board of Film Classification and what they would find unsuitable. Yet our online regulation has not kept pace. Particular concern is content that depict sexual activity with children. Teen or incest porn, it contains young -looking performers made to look under age through props such as stuffed toys, lollipops, and school uniforms.

This normalises children as objects of sexual desire and drive this demand for child sexual material. Similarly, pornography abuses of got round the ban on incest material by promoting porn vehicles in which there is step incest. In a society where many of us have blended families it is not right that stepdaughter pornography is illegal no matter if the act is over 18. My amendment would ensure it is illegal off-line and online. We must also ensure that all illegal pornographic content regular to equally online regardless of where that content is hosted.

The Online Safety Act has illegal content that only applies to pornography websites that host user-to-user interactions or user generated content. Pornography websites that only host commercially produced pornography are exempt from legal duties. We must not allow this to continue. My amendment will ensure that all pornography sites must adhere to a legal content duty. Finally it is important river that the acts of sexual violence I spoke about our perpetrated against real women and girls. This is not acting or performing. Women are often forced or coerced into this industry, and once in it, even the most famous pornography performers are exploited.

For example, Kate was traffic from the UK to the pornography industry in America, she suffered horrendous abuse, was forced to take part in dangerous and degrading sex acts on film. The consequences of what she did stayed with her despite escaping the industry. The truth is there is no way of knowing if the women were appearing pornography have given their consent or if they are even their consent or if they are even adults. My amendment NC 105 means pornography websites must verify the age and consent of every individual who features and allow individuals to withdraw consent at any time.

I look forward to working with the government and colleagues across the House to ensure we tackle the harmful impact made by this multibillion pound industry. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I rise to speak to new clause 123, an rise to speak to new clause 123, an amendment from my honourable friend. I have to say I'm surprised I'm having to speak to this today. I
15:59
Saqib Bhatti Portrait Saqib Bhatti MP (Meriden and Solihull East, Conservative)
-
-
having to speak to this today. I applaud the, I implored Mr to give due consideration to this clause not least because it was pushed on a cross-party basis in the last Parliament by Baroness Harman. In fact on the date was pushed I think she was away due to a personal matter. It was pushed by the member for Yardley who is of course now the Minister for Safeguarding and the Minister for violence against women and girls. In many ways, the Minister will know this concerns the direct constituent of mine.

I will speak to her experience but I would encourage her to give due consideration, and maybe in her remarks if the amendment is not taken up, she can clarify why there is delay in taking it up. This was well on its way so I would be curious to know. But this amendment seeks to remove the parental rights of convicted sex offenders. It is unconscionable to my constituents that children could be subject to living with the sex offenders because that sex offender is their parent.

And it is reprehensible that the law currently allows for that to happen. And it allows convicted criminals who have committed the most heinous crimes to exploit the law. It puts vulnerable children at risk. I right honourable Friend was generous to me about this amendment but the truth is, it is my constituents who have driven this. I constituents who have driven this. I remember the first time the constituent, her parents when they first came to see me and the sheer, I don't know as a father if I was in their position if I would be able to keep my composure in the way that they did.

I did the honest way they spoke about it. And they continue to The other experience I had was in the gallery up there where I could see the sheer joy of their constituents, and when the Beckham's daughter father was banned from future contracts from children, he was not banned from contacting his own child, and this amendment could stop that. It would give Bethan and others the assurances that she needs to know, that her child will not be contacted by a convicted paedophile, and I'm sure the Minister agrees, very capable minister and good person, but no parent should have to go through this.

It languishes a lot of parents who don't have that clarity. A further importance on this case is that Bethan had to fund the case herself, so there are those without legal aid, and to be able to restrict the parental rights. That is not something that every parent will be able to achieve, and the most paramount consideration is the safeguarding of the child and protecting the innocent victims, but of course, it should certainly not be available to those who can afford it.

The new clause was championed by the member for Yardley, and I have a quote warehouse can individual be considered too detailed to work with or be around other people yet have the responsibility in a child's life so long as the child is Tyrone. I don't think that is a controversial statement to make, so I really would ask the Minister to give this amendment due consideration. It is clearly something that is very important to me in my constituency, and if it doesn't go through today, I will be pushing numerous debates on this and bringing in a Private Member's Bill on this.

When I spoke to Bethan's family, they talked about how devastated they were that this wasn't going forward, and I hope the Minister will recognise the anguish this delay is causing.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I rise to support

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I rise to support amendments to new clause 50 and 60 in my name. These amendments will seek to address two specific but seek to address two specific but crucial failings in the current road
16:03
Will Stone Portrait Will Stone MP (Swindon North, Labour)
-
-
crucial failings in the current road clause, the absence of driving without having held a licence, and insufficient consequences for people who failed to stop after an incident. These amendments are in honour of Kerry Barker, a much loved 14-year-old whose life was tragically cut short on 24 November 2022 on his way to school. I engaged with the family and this is truly devastating for them to have lost their child at such an early point in his life. I extend my deepest in the two his parents and I admire their courage for seeking change in their grief.

The driver who killed Harriet had no insurance and did not stop, yet shockingly, all charges were dropped. The police and the Crown Prosecution Service followed the law but that is the very issue. That is why I am here. The law does not recognise the gravity of these events and were committed by someone who shouldn't be behind the wheel in the first place. This is why I have brought forward these two amendments. New clause 15 on unlicensed drivers would amend section 87 to introduce tough penalties for individuals who have never held a licence.

A new clause 16 on the offence would amend the act to allow thoughts to allow a custodial sentence and disqualification for driving up to 2 years. And more importantly, it would allow the courts to impose any combination of those penalties. No law can bring Harry back. No sentence will ease the pain of the family and friends. These amendments are about restoring the balance in sending a clear message. If you choose to drive without a licence, if you run from the scene of a crash, there will be real consequences.

I appreciate these amendments may not go forward, but I would ask that the government take them seriously with the strategy and I hope we can push this forward in the future. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise to speak to the amendment

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise to speak to the amendment in my name, new clause 156. I bring this amendment forward today because of Isabella. Isabella is a 14-year- of Isabella. Isabella is a 14-year- old girl. She lives in my constituency and in May this year, constituency and in May this year, Isabella was hanging out with friends in line Regis when she was lured to the cemetery for a group of lured to the cemetery for a group of young people were waiting. One of them had their phone out was already filming her arrival.

Moments later, filming her arrival. Moments later, another girl launched a brutal assault. I had was smashed against
16:06
Edward Morello Portrait Edward Morello MP (West Dorset, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
assault. I had was smashed against the concrete step. She was stamped on, she was kicked in the face again and again. While Isabella was being attacked, no one stopped to help. Instead they stood by and filmed. They laughed and they demanded to be sent the video. The attack was premeditated but so too was the filming. The recording began before Isabella even arrived. It was not taken to provide evidence or to expose wrongdoing but was taken deliberately in order to broadcast her humiliation and glorify the violence.

I have seen this video and it is horrific. Isabella's mother has seen this video. Her friends have seen this video. Hundreds possibly thousands of people have seen this video because it was intentionally and maliciously circulated on social media and in private WhatsApp groups in schools across west Dorset. Children who do not even know Isabella saw her brutal attack play out on their phones. The violence didn't stop the attack. It was shared, forwarded, replayed, whispered about. Isabella's attacker was charged with bodily hard and received anger management classes and six months restraining order.

A six-month restraining order. This was bad enough but the people who filmed it walked away entirely unpunished. The filming started before the attack occurred was that they knew the attack was coming, they plan to film it and they proceeded to share the video while laughing. They did not walk away unpunished because there was no proof of what they did. The video was the proof. But because our law does not yet recognise this specific premeditated deeply harmful behaviour as the offence should be.

That is why I believe new clause 156 is so important. It seeks to create a specific defence of premeditated filming and distribution of violent acts with the intent to humiliate, distress, and psychologically harm the victims. It recognises what to many families already know, that this is not about kick delivered but the deliberate choice to film violence, to broadcast it, to humiliate the victim repeatedly for an audience that grows with every share, every click, every message. We are not talking about evidence or journalism, about someone capturing wrongdoing.

It makes it very clear that there is an explicit safeguarding this amendment to protect public interest journalism being used as evidence, where somebody willingly knows an attack to amplify the victims humiliation, that behaviour faces the consequences. Isabella's case is not

**** Possible New Speaker ****

an isolated one. He is speaking with great passion

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He is speaking with great passion about his constituent. Yesterday, I about his constituent. Yesterday, I held a roundtable with parents and my constituents talking about mobile my constituents talking about mobile phone use in schools. One of the parents was a GP and she spoke about how children who have been subject how children who have been subject to these attacks have come to her surgery say that they're contemplating suicide because of contemplating suicide because of what they faced. So she agreed that this goes way beyond humiliation go to some of the worst kinds of mental

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to some of the worst kinds of mental health problems that young people could face? I agree that the lasting psychological damage is something we cannot fully understand especially as this is a growing problem. I received further letters from other people telling me about similar incidents that happened in other towns and playgrounds, and this towns and playgrounds, and this problem is rising. 2024 survey said that many people saw real-world violence online in the past year and violence online in the past year and most of that footage was involving young people.

This is happening in our communities right now and the our communities right now and the law is failing to keep pace. Our children face normal pressures from social media from online buddy and, from apps designed to expose them to content far beyond the years. As parents, we do our best to protect them but we have a duty to put deterrents in place where social media companies have failed us. We have a duty to send a clear message that this behaviour is unacceptable.

It is dangerous and will not go unpunished. I will leave you with the words of Isabella's mother Sarah. I have to live with the flashbacks of watching my daughter being beaten. But I also have to live with knowledge that this video will be forever available on social media. On behalf of Sarah, on behalf of Isabella, I hope the government will support a change to the law to something positive coming from the experience.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I pay tribute to the speech that we have just heard the speech that we have just heard the member from West Dorset. He is such a powerful advocate for the horrific
16:11
Anneliese Midgley Portrait Anneliese Midgley MP (Knowsley, Labour)
-
-
a powerful advocate for the horrific things that happen to his constituents. I rise to speak in support of new clause 48 which stands in my name. A create a new stand-alone offence, a delivery worker, before I begin, I want to refer members to make register of interests as a member of the GMB. Delivery workers are vital to our local economies. They link shops with homes, cafe's with customers, communities with each other and they help to keep our High Street alive but too often, they are abused, assaulted or attacked just for doing their job.

Woolston has been verbally abused and threatened with violence on people's doorsteps for asking for ID when delivering alcohol. As the law requires him to. Or Emiliano. She has been riding in Kent since 2018. She has had to motorbike stolen and has been pelted. And sometimes it is far worse. Claudia, Carol Condor was an Amazon delivery driver. He was killed in Leeds last year. The thief jumped into his van while he was delivering parcels. Claudia tried to stop him for topic land the vehicle for half a mile pleading for the thief to stop.

He was deliberately knocked off and killed. He bought that band just three weeks earlier. He was trying to protect his livelihood and instead, he lost his life. No one should leave home to go to work and not come back. These are just a few stories but they are not isolated. The trade union has found that 77% of delivery workers for major retailers like Tesco, Sainsbury's, Asda, cardo, Morrisons, Iceland have been a victim of abuse in the last year.

1/4 have turned down deliveries because they feared for their safety. And 13% have them physically assaulted. And this is happening during an academic of retail crime. Shoplifting has nearly doubled since the pandemic and rose by 23% last year alone. In-store retail staff also faced absolutely shocking abuse, and I welcome the Labour government's commitment to protect retail workers with the stand-alone offence, something that through the freedom from fear campaign has campaigned and fought for four years.

It is the right move because nobody should feel unsafe or face abuse, verbal or physical just for doing their work. But delivery workers are on the frontline as well. They work alone, often at night. They are public facing and can be vulnerable, and when things go wrong, missing item, a delay, the wrong order, they are the ones who face the backlash. Too often frustration turns into abuse, violence, or worse. They deserve the same protection that this government is rightly offering to staff in stores.

And when Parliament places extra responsibilities and delivery workers to police much-needed Lords on age verification, Parliament should legislate to provide additional protections for them. And this is backed by the GMB union, delivery, the British Retail Consortium and UK hospitality trade bodies and trade unions campaigning together because they know the reality. They see what delivery workers face every day. And since the COVID pandemic, delivery riders have become a part of the fabric of our daily lives, how we shop and rely on them.

So while my amendment today will not be pushed to a vote, I would like to press the Labour government to meet with me, the unions, trade bodies and employers to look a new clause 48 in more detail.
16:15
Ben Obese-Jecty Portrait Ben Obese-Jecty MP (Huntingdon, Conservative)
-
-
I wish to speak today about new clauses 84, 85 and 86 and return to the issue of policing and police funding. New clause 86 sees the Lib Dems seek to address the government recently announced policing plan. It plans to recruit an additional 30,000 police officers, a figure that does not stack up. I spoke last week on Westminster Hall about the discrepancies in the pledge, the lack of clarity around the baseline figure, the fuzziness around their 3000 officers transfer from other roles determined to implement it, the fact that the officers over counted as being a neighbourhood roles by police forces in England and means that 3000 officers the government has announced is all but net neutral in terms of police officers, an increase of just 389 officers once the adjustment was officers once the adjustment was New clause 86 misunderstands this.

It makes no reference to decision- making responsibilities, much of the government has stability to the redeposit of 3000 officers without expending how aware. New clause 86 states that the Home Office must publish proposals detailing the extra funding that will be required to ensure police officers can meet these requirements without reducing officer numbers on the front line. It fails to stipulate that funding is inequitable in the first instance. I've spoken at length regarding the allocation and I would ask the Liberal Democrats and if they would join me in giving cause for the policing minister to make sure the base allocation of the four Miller is updated to reflect the population increase and distribution that has occurred and the formula was first introduced.

I am aware that the Policing Minister stated on 5 June that there is a White Paper coming in the next few months. I want to make clear that within that there will have to be discussion about finances and resources for policing force I welcome the discussion and I know that the Policing Minister will if nothing else speak keen to address my priorities if only to get me off their back. New clause 85 mentions funding in the context of minimum levels of policing.

The Liberal Democrats asked for every police force in England and Wales to maintain neighbourhood policing teams at a level necessary to ensure effective community engagement with crime prevention. But who is to place that level? Is it at the discretion of the Chief Constable, the police crime Commissioner, the metro mayor, the policing list, or the Home Secretary? Furthermore, a ring fenced allocation of 20% would hamper the flexibility of operation budgets and we should be allowing them the freedom of operations with the arbiters of how the resources may be employed most effectively.

Lastly you clause 84 is an area that appears to have been overlooked by the government in their recent announcements. The National rural unit will look at this, it was established under the last government in 2023 and has been established with cultural machinery and vehicles worth over £10 million. There's also coordinated UK-wide responses to arrest as well as organised crime groups. Temperatures rural action team punches above its weight. Last year it recovered almost £1 million of stolen property, seized 163 vehicles used in crime, attended more than 1700 incidents and prosecuted 83 suspects.

They work closely with the National rural but they are underfunded and resourced. Cambridge is a large county with the difficult rural areas. And they rely on a small team of officers to take on machinery theft and real danger of organised crime, an issue which needs to be tackled. The government neighbourhood policing plan losses over the need for greater police presence in the communities. In my constituency there are dozens of villages that will in theory have a named officer.

How that prevent someone take your vehicle at 3 AM on isolated farm? The government has talked a good game but the strategy has holes all over it. And senior police officers have repeatedly raised concerns about the Police Allocation Formula remaining unchanged. On the last point I expect the forthcoming White Paper to address the changes I have repeatedly and consistently called for and for Cambridge Constabulary to be funded fairly and the officers to be properly resourced.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I rise to speak to new clause 44, rise to speak to new clause 44, otherwise known as a law tabled on otherwise known as a law tabled on behalf of an individual. I signed this on behalf of 54 Labour Conservative and Liberal Democrat
16:19
Kirith Entwistle Portrait 7 Kirith Entwistle MP (Bolton North East, Labour)
-
-
Conservative and Liberal Democrat members. And for the opportunity to continue the work of the member for Birmingham Yardley and the member of the women's committee which I'm proud to be a member. She was a young woman and was murdered by her father and five male cousins in an honour killing. Her crime was to leave an abusive husband who she had reported for rape. Leaving she had brought shame and dishonour upon the family, the community was chillingly called a council of war.

Her body was found months later buried in a suitcase in the back garden in Birmingham. This horrific incident did not begin with her mother. She went to the police five times. She reported rape, she named her abusers, she predict her own death. Still her cries for help were dismissed. An investigation of the independent lease complaints commission to the handling of the case later found to pull serious failings. This was not only a family crime, it was a community crime.

Please estimate that as many as 50 men were involved in plotting the men were involved in plotting the murder, covering it up, or encouraging the honour narrative. Her uncle called her death justice will stop others called him a hero. Her case was not unique. Other cases, all women subject to honour- based abuse. The Domestic Abuse Commissioner estimates that around 12 honour killings take place in the UK every year. More than 7000 incidents of honour-based incidents are recorded annually.

The true scale is almost certainly greater. What I fully support the importance that this bill takes to tackle violence against women and girls, I am concerned by insufficient focus on honour-based abuse. I'm grateful to the Minister for Victims for taking the time to meet with me. However, I must stress that this does not adequately content with these issues and is not sufficiently capable of yielding change. My amendment course for honour-based abuse to be recognised in law as an aggravating factor in sentencing.

It also calls for victim survivors who act in self defence, or under coercion after years of abuse, to have the context recognised as mitigating factors. This amendment, statue gardens across the Criminal Justice Bill can be given so that police, prosecutors and courts are trained to recognise and respond to this collective form of abuse. I want to pay tribute to her sister, the courage and tireless work have brought us to this point. I will not be pressing my amendment to a vote today for top I hope ministers will take the opportunity to reflect on the need to take further action against all forms of honour-based abuse.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think the member ran out of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

time. I remember raising the case. I come to Richard Holden. Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. Today I rise in support six of the Today I rise in support six of the new clauses that go to the heart of my responsible these as legislators. my responsible these as legislators. Safeguarding children, restoring and building confidence in law, and defending free expression. I won't be able to go into all of this. You be able to go into all of this. You clause 45 seeks to ensure that an
16:23
Richard Holden Portrait Rt Hon Richard Holden MP (Basildon and Billericay, Conservative)
-
-
clause 45 seeks to ensure that an individual under the age of 18 where they have been cautioned or convicted of a child sex is, police must notify any organisation that the child is involved in, where they are with other children. Or the organisation. This amendment stems from a real case in the constituency and closes a dangerous and demonstrably harmful safeguarding loophole which I have already discussed privately with the member for Birmingham Yardley. I hope the government will look at this as it takes this legislation through the other place.

New clause 46 addresses another gap in legislation. The ability to buy a car without providing any form of verified ID, or proving you can drive. This is in memory of Andrew Rowlands, and will make it harder for criminals and reckless drivers to use vehicles with impunity. New clause 108 tabled by the member for West Suffolk seeks to reaffirm the right to speak freely about religion or belief including criticism, satire, and dissent, restoring clarity to our public order laws.

I think it is very closely aligned to the new clause 7 put forward by the opposition front bench today. We need to start addressing some of these non-crime hate issues which are becoming a pernicious attack upon freedom in our society. More broadly, it was great to hear the member for Lowestoft speaking just before about the pornography and some of the amendments that she has put forward. I am very supportive of new clause 103. In fact I did some work recently with the British Board of Film Classification.

There were quite clearly major issues between what is allowed to be broadcast age-related within traditional broadcast settings, and what is also differently available online. We note there is a growing body of evidence that violent abusive pornography with increased rates of sexual aggression especially towards women and girls. I am fully in support of that and hope the government pay attention to what the honourable member opposite is putting forward. Finally around new clause 150, relating to cousin marriage. I rise to support this, I'm glad that the opposition front bench has put forward because I spoke at length about this earlier on today in Westminster Hall.

This represents the next logical step in a series of ongoing efforts to protect the vulnerable and promote social cohesion. I've already introduced a Private Members' Bill on the marriage element of this session, and following the successful challenge to virginity testing. When it comes to protecting women and men from out dated coercive and harmful practices, this House must not look the other way. This is not about race and religion, it is about freedom, societal cohesion and health. Freedom because consent is meaningless, where families can pressure young men into cousin marriages they don't wish.

We must stand up for those without a voice and give them the legal backing stop multigenerational cousin marriage often fosters huge issues around social segregation, looking introduced into closed systems of authority. In countries like Norway and Denmark have acted decisively, there is no excuse for us to lag behind others with progressive credentials as well. In health because there is a real risk. We have seen a study that has been going on for many years and found the real societal indications. We still don't know the full side effects of multigenerational first cousin marriages as well.

We rightly believe in racial ships where there is consent, between teachers and pupils, doctors and patients, and the same thing applies here. This clause is rooted in compassion not condemnation. It speaks to freedom especially for women and the courage to legislate my silence anything that causes harm. I would like to say each of these amendments addresses difference. Child safety, public accountancy, Freedom of Expression (Religion or Belief System) Bill, but they are united on the principle that the law should

**** Possible New Speaker ****

protect the vulnerable, demand response avidity and preserve the freedoms which are healthy confident society depends. Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I rise to support amendment 122 brought by my honourable friend for brought by my honourable friend for North America and Bedworth. In 2007, Fiona Pilkington drove herself and her 18-year-old daughter, Francesca her 18-year-old daughter, Francesca Hardwick, the layby near her home. She also took the families pet
16:28
Marie Tidball Portrait Dr Marie Tidball MP (Penistone and Stocksbridge, Labour)
-
-
She also took the families pet rabbit to sue the daughter who had severe learning disabilities. She then set the car on fire killing them both. An inquest two is later heard how the family had been kept virtual prisoners in their home by youths who through Stones, flower, and other objects, and kept up a relentless stream of abuse. At the time, the IPCC concluded that one of the main failings of the police was in not identifying the abuse as hate crime.

The case prompted wider concern. Many police forces were failing to poppy identify hate crimes motivated by disability. And thus treating them as low priority antisocial behaviour. Something disability campaigners say too often remains the case today. I am proud that last year our Labour manifesto committed to championing the rights of disabled people, and to the principle of working with them so that their views and voices will be at the heart of all we do. I support new clause 122, tabled by my honourable friend for North America and Bedworth.

It would implement our manifesto commitment to protect LGBT+ and disabled people by making all existing strands of hate crime and aggravated offence. This would finally place on a statutory footing the Law Commissions recommendations because, as they highlighted, it is undesirable for the current law to give the impression of a hierarchy of victims. The bill before us today will be a powerful one in delivering the government's safer streets mission and Plan for Change. We help to tackle the crimes that matter most to communities.

But been ignored for too long after 14 years of the Tory dereliction on law and order. Disability hate crime is one such example. Under the Conservatives, there was a staggering nearly 700% increase of police recorded disability hate police recorded disability hate police recorded disability hate As chair of the APPG autism, I am concerned about the impact on disabled people and those with learning disabilities. Hate crime can wreck lives. It creates a huge mental health problem for people with learning disabilities and autism.

People who often don't have the ability to understand or cope with it. Those are the words of Mark Brooks, hate crime ambassador for the charity dimensions who was part of their I'm with Sam campaign for no more learning disability and autism hate crime. Aggravated offences currently only exist for offences involving racial or religious hostility. The higher maximum penalties available for aggravated offences are perceived to have a more powerful symbolic and deterrent effect. Higher maximum penalties mean aggravated offences are often pursued in the Crown Court rather than the Magistrate's Court.

As the hate crime charity have argued, the Crown Courts are more appropriate forum for dealing with the gravity and victim impact of hate crime offences, as well as crown courts having superior facilities for victims. As someone who has researched the experiences of disabled people in the criminal justice system for over 14 years, the opportunity to legislate and strengthen the law on hate crime offences should be seized. Disabled people in rich our society. And this amendment to the bill before us today would foster respect and equality for all by ensuring justice for disabled victims of hate crime.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much. I would like to start by demonstrating my support
16:32
Luke Taylor Portrait Luke Taylor MP (Sutton and Cheam, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
to start by demonstrating my support for new clauses 85 and 86 which deal with neighbourhood policing. They would ensure that police forces are required to practice community policing at a level necessary to ensure community engagement and crime prevention. It's a shame the member for Islington isn't in his place with the definition of that because it would be engaging for communities, engaging to find appropriate levels in areas rather than having a top-down view which I'm sure the gentleman would support himself. We would compel the secretary of state to produce an annual report on the state of community policing as well, and we outline the way forward for outlining this as well.

The future police grants will make crime pay. We reverse the manner that it is normally used by allocating funds recovered from the proceeds of crime act to community policing. This is important because commitment to police numbers mean very little without serious action to reverse the scale of forthcoming cuts like those we are about to experience in London where we see cuts of officers and staff. As a commissioner of the Metropolitan police force, ambition and money go alongside each other.

So, I urge members around the house to support these aims. I turn now to my new clause 95 and it is good to see the honourable member in her place to continue the conversation we have had a number of times regarding stalking for it is a heinous crime that leaves victims and life changing terror and two often goes unpunished. The current legislation forces to many victims to meet high bar of evidence to be a perfect victim to prove the scale of threat against them.

I've heard from constituents who have had their lives upended by stalkers who are at their wits end after facing Sony obstacles to justice. Two sections are at the root of these obstacles. The distinction between section offences are failing victims that fail to recognise the total scope of stalking. Successful prosecutions
Feed Live - Click to view video
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page