Commons Chamber

Monday 27th October 2025

(began 2 weeks, 6 days ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
15:09
15:09
None Portrait Q12. If he will take legislative steps to ensure that companies who previously provided indexation of pension rights accrued before April 1997 but have since lapsed, reintroduce indexation from April 2026. (906012)
-

Nia Griffith Mr. Speaker.
15:10
15:10
15:11
15:11
15:12
15:12
None Portrait Q13. What assessment he has made of trends in the level of child poverty in Cornwall. (906013)
-

But Maguire.
15:12
15:13
15:13
15:14
15:15
15:15
None Portrait Q14. What recent progress he has made on establishing the Youth Guarantee trailblazer scheme. (906014)
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Patricia Ferguson. Number 14, please, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The
15:15
15:15
15:16
15:17
15:17
15:18
15:18
15:19
15:19
None Portrait Topical questions: Work and Pensions
-

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Second time lucky.
15:19
15:20
15:21
15:21
15:22
15:22
15:23
15:24
15:24
15:24
15:25
15:25
15:26
15:26
15:27
15:27
15:28
15:28
15:29
15:29
15:29
15:30
15:30
15:31
15:31
15:32
15:32
15:33
15:33
15:33
15:34
15:35
15:35
15:35
15:36
15:36
15:36
15:37
15:37
15:38
15:38
15:39
15:39
15:40
15:40
15:40
15:40
15:42
None Portrait Urgent question: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero if he will make a statement on the future of the North Sea oil and gas industry
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Right. Right. We Right. We now Right. We now come Right. We now come to Right. We now come to the Right. We now come to the Urgent Question. Sherwood Forest Andrew Bowie.
15:42
15:42
Michael Shanks Portrait Michael Shanks MP, Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero) (Rutherglen, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Mr. Speaker. The North Sea will be at the heart of Britain's energy future. For decades.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For decades. Its workers, businesses and communities have helped power our country and our world, and they country and our world, and they will do so for decades to come. The oil and gas industry has lost around a third of its entire workforce in the last decade, as oil and gas production has declined. A plan is now needed. And that is why in March, we consulted on a framework for building a world leading offshore clean energy industry in the North Sea, alongside managing existing oil and gas fields for their lifespan.

We will respond to that consultation in the coming weeks, and alongside that, we published our Clean Energy Jobs Plan, which sets out over 400,000 more good jobs to be created across the UK, including 40,000 in Scotland by the end of the decade. Facilitated thanks to record investments in clean energy and the certainty that our plans have created to see over £50 billion worth of private investment since July 2024. Now turning, Mr. Speaker, to today's news. Colleagues in the House will be aware that Petrofac Limited have for some time been working on a restructure relating to their global portfolio.

This restructuring plan failed following the unexpected termination of a contract by tenant, a Dutch transmission company, and at 7 a.m. today, holding company Petrofac Limited announced that it will be entering administration. Now, while obviously disappointing for the company, this is the product of long standing issues with their global business. Contrary to misleading reports, today, the UK arm of Petrofac has not entered administration and is continuing to operate as normal as an in-demand business with a highly skilled workforce and many successful contracts.

Indeed, only last month, Petrofac UK arm extended to significant contracts demonstrating this business has a viable future. The announcement today only covers the top level holding company, Petrofac Limited, which has no employees. The Petrofac Group has faced long standing challenges, including a high profile £77 million financial penalty imposed in 2021 following a Serious Fraud Office investigation into bribery. Now we understand that there is reason to be optimistic about a commercial resolution, including the UK arm, and the government has been and will remain in close contact with the company.

And I repeat this to the House. The UK business has not entered administration. It is successful and growing and it will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

continue to operate as normal. Andrew Bowie. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
15:44
Andrew Bowie Portrait Andrew Bowie MP (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine, Conservative)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. speaker, another week, yet another hammer blow to our North Sea oil and gas industry, another Sea oil and gas industry, another gut punch to energy workers, another blow to our energy security. And, Mr. Speaker, the blame whatever the Minister says today lies squarely with this Labour government today. Today the energy giant, they don't like to hear it, Mr. Speaker, but today the energy giant Petrofac has entered administration, casting doubt over the future of their 2000 employees in Scotland as their global HQ is in Aberdeen and countless more supported indirectly through the supply chain.

This is a company that, as the Minister has said, has had issues for many years. But the hostile environment created by this government in the UK continental shelf has made operating here for far too many companies nigh on impossible since the 2024 general election, there have been thousands of redundancies in our offshore energy industry. Harbour energy completed a new round of redundancies just last month with depressing regularity. Mr. speaker, we hear of more job losses in the North Sea, whether that be at Harbour Energy, Apache hunting or Petrofac.

Each job lost means uncertainty for a family, a mortgage jeopardise investment, fleeing our communities and our world class supply chains and skilled workforce pushed towards extinction. Minister, how many more of these will it take for the Secretary of State for energy to change course? These are political choices. This is a manufactured decline as a direct result, as a direct result of the hostile trading environment. The closed for business sign is hanging over the UK continental shelf from the Energy Profits Levy extension and increase to the ban on new licences to the refusal to defend the government's decision on Rosebank and Jackdaw.

The odds are stacked against the North Sea industry, damaging the business environment, threatening investment, harming our economy and undermining our energy security. These are political choices that have resulted in job losses. So can I ask the Minister what steps are being taken to support Petrofac HQ employees in Aberdeen? How many more jobs have to be lost across the industry for this government to change course? When will the thousands of jobs promised through GB energy for Aberdeen and around the United Kingdom materialise? And will he personally act and ask his boss, Secretary of State for energy, to change course? Or is he content to sacrifice Aberdeen, the North East and our energy industry on this vainglorious campaign to destroy

**** Possible New Speaker ****

our fossil fuel industry? Minister? Well. Mr. Speaker, can I say to the
15:47
Michael Shanks Portrait Michael Shanks MP, Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero) (Rutherglen, Labour)
-
-
honourable gentleman that on the issue of petrofac, I just say that he should be careful with his tone to come here and try to undermine efforts to find a buyer for the UK arm. To talk down a successful business, which I have just outlined, is a successful and growing business in the North Sea is deeply irresponsible. There have been long standing issues at this company and as a former minister, he of all people should know of these long standing issues and he will be well aware of that given his previous role.

We all have a responsibility here across the House to support this company at the moment, not to undermine it and to send a positive message to those workers, the suppliers and the customers that the UK arm is continuing to operate as normal. All the signs are that there is a viable long term future for this company, but not if we have comments like the honourable gentleman has put forward today undermining that business. Mr. speaker, on the wider question of the North Sea. He knows as well as anyone or he should know that under his party's in government, we lost over a third of the jobs in the North Sea.

He wants to pretend that this transition arrived in July 2024. But he was in government. He was in government when these jobs were going, and they failed time and time and time again to come up with any credible plan for how they manage the future North Sea. We will not do that. We will come up with a plan. And that is why we are building the industries of the future on hydrogen, on carbon capture, on offshore wind, on the supply chains, the very investments that he and his honourable friends on that side turn their back against.

Time and time again, they are turning their backs on the future of the energy story in the North Sea. More interested in exploiting problems than actually solving them. And time and time again, they have learned no lessons from their time in government when they left these workers without a credible plan. We will not do the same again.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Patricia Ferguson. Mr. speaker, and I wonder if my
15:49
15:49
15:50
Pippa Heylings Portrait Pippa Heylings MP (South Cambridgeshire, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Pippa Heylings the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

worrying news. Petrofac is one of the North. Sea's largest offshore. Contractors.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Contractors. But after years of financial difficulty, is entering administration today. Whilst I cannot. Share the honourable member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine, his desire to ditch the Kincardine, his desire to ditch the Climate Change Act, I do share his concern for these 2000 jobs in Scotland and those workers who face uncertainty about their future. So the Secretary of State must act the Secretary of State must act swiftly to find a sustainable. Path forward, hopefully secure a buyer and safeguard these skilled jobs.

and safeguard these skilled jobs. And this underlines why the Liberal Democrats have called for an independent Just Transition commission, putting oil and gas workers and local communities front and centre. And it was good to see and centre. And it was good to see the much awaited publication of the government's Clean Energy Jobs Plan last week. However, we do know job last week. However, we do know job creation is not happening fast enough to keep up with job losses in the North Sea. So can the Secretary of State and the Minister Secretary of State and the Minister confirm what will be done to fill that gap in the meantime, in the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

short term, and deliver a genuinely just transition that keeps these skilled workers powering Britain's clean energy future? Minister.
15:51
Michael Shanks Portrait Michael Shanks MP, Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero) (Rutherglen, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Minister. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, can I just say, first of all, what a contrast it is with someone responding to this concerning issue, as she rightly says in a serious way and not talking down the industry. And I think this is actually where this House should stand taller and recognise that this is a company that's doing good work, that there are workers right now, 2000 of them out in the North Sea carrying out their duties. We want to make sure that that is a viable future for the company, and we're doing everything that we can in that space.

And all the signs are that it is a growing, successful business. We should recognise that and talk it up, not talk it down. As the Conservative Party seem hell bent on doing. Can I just say on her wider point, she's right to say that, of course, the future of clean energy jobs is tens of thousands across Scotland and hundreds of thousands across the UK, but that we need to ramp those jobs up as quickly as possible and make sure that people can achieve those jobs.

We're doing what we can around looking at the skills framework in place, but also making sure that through investments, we're making great British energy. Those jobs come forward much faster and that people are supported to move from jobs in oil and gas into those jobs where we know there's a real correlation in skills in the future. We're picking this work up after a failure of the previous government to have any plan. We're moving as fast as we can, and we'll see more on that North Sea plan in the coming weeks.
15:52
15:54
15:55
15:55
Michael Shanks Portrait Michael Shanks MP, Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero) (Rutherglen, Labour)
-
-
I'm in Aberdeen regularly and do meet his constituents who are working right now in renewables and carbon capture and hydrogen jobs, as well as his constituents who work in oil and gas, his constituents who benefit from investments that great British energy will make, for example, which he failed to vote for, and who also tell me that after a long period of time of having no credible plan on if he can shout, he can shout me down all he wants, he can shout me down all he wants.

He asked a question.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

But I'm just going to say to honourable member, I brought you in early because I thought it was right to your constituents and right to your constituents and you'd apply for UQ. But I do expect a little respect, even if you don't like the answer. Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

like the answer. Minister. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. He asks a serious question, and I'm trying to give him an answer if he would. to give him an answer if he would. But listen for a few moments. We do take seriously the issue of job losses. Of course we do. And I do losses. Of course we do. And I do take them very seriously. But what we have to recognise is that there have been 70,000 jobs lost over the past ten years without a credible past ten years without a credible plan on the future of the North Sea, we are going to deliver that.

We are delivering new jobs in the are delivering new jobs in the energy future alongside that. But I would also just say to him, I'm somewhat confused what the SNP's somewhat confused what the SNP's policy is on this because as far as I understood it, it is exactly the same policy as this government has, which is to which is to look at the which is to which is to look at the licensing position. Now, if he is telling us now that the SNP's position has changed, then that's position has changed, then that's news to me and I suspect to the House.

But of course, they have not published the draft energy strategy

**** Possible New Speaker ****

published the draft energy strategy that's been in draft form for two know. Polly Billington thank you, Mr.
15:57
15:58
15:58
15:59
15:59
16:00
16:01
16:01
16:02
16:03
16:03
16:04
16:05
16:06
16:06
16:07
Michael Shanks Portrait Michael Shanks MP, Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero) (Rutherglen, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. Well, look, I take her first point with a pinch of salt after her second point where she said her second point where she said that this comes as a hammer blow to the community, there is no hammer blow. Those jobs have been protected and there are 2000 workers today waking up doing the same job as they were doing last week. So I take a bit of a pinch of salt with that point. She's right, of course, to say, look, I am in Aberdeen.

I don't pretend she's an Aberdeen MP of course she hears from her constituents much more than I am when I'm there. But I've made an effort to be there as often as possible to hear the concerns, but also to recognise that that is exactly why we need to move further and faster than we have done for the past 14 years of the previous government, 18 years of the Scottish Government to put a credible plan in place for the future of those jobs. That does mean investing in future jobs, but also making sure that the processes are in place so people can take advantage of those jobs much more easily.

Passporting, something which was stuck in the mud for years, is now being delivered because we helped to unlock it. Now there's a lot more to do, and we'll say that in the coming weeks when we publish our future of the North Sea Plan. But we are the ones driving forward investment that creates the jobs of the future. And I'm afraid other parties, and I did not until today, count her party as one of those are harking back to the past rather than recognising the jobs of the future.

Need to go hand in hand with good, well-paid oil and gas jobs in the short term.
16:08
16:09
16:09
16:10
16:10
16:11
16:12
16:13
16:14
16:14
16:15
16:15
16:16
16:16
16:17
16:17
16:18
16:19
16:20
16:20
16:21
16:21
16:22
16:22
16:23
16:24
16:25
16:25
16:26
16:27
16:27
16:28
Michael Shanks Portrait Michael Shanks MP, Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero) (Rutherglen, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yes, sir. I thank you for the way he's put the question. And I would firstly just say, look, energy security is just say, look, energy security is at the heart of what we're trying to do because our exposure to fossil fuels is what led to some of the most significant price spikes in all of our constituents. Bills that they are still facing today are continued exposure to the impact of Russias invasion of Ukraine, even though none of that Russian gas now reaches us is because of the international markets that drive it forward.

So the only way to take back control of our energy is by building the clean power system of the future, that the pace of that transition is absolutely right. We are driving forward momentum now to make sure that the investment comes forward, to create the jobs in the economy. Right now that's been successful, £50 billion just in the past year of private investment. My view is that we should have recognised 10 or 20 years ago under the previous Labour government and under the previous Conservative government, that a transition was under way and put in place then a credible plan for protecting those jobs, that was not done.

But we are now determined to do it so that the future transition for oil and gas workers is into good, well-paid jobs in renewables, carbon capture, hydrogen and other

**** Possible New Speaker ****

technologies, and so that we have a genuinely just and prosperous transition. Llinos Medi job. Losses in the
16:30
16:30
16:30
16:30
16:31
16:31
16:32
16:32
16:33
16:34
16:35
16:35
16:35
16:36
16:37
None Portrait Ministerial statement: Strengthening Prisoner Release Checks
-

16:38
David Lammy Portrait Rt Hon David Lammy MP, The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Tottenham, Labour)
-
-
With With your With your permission, With your permission, I'd With your permission, I'd like With your permission, I'd like to make a statement on the release. In make a statement on the release. In an era of Haddish Kybartai from HMP an era of Haddish Kybartai from HMP Chelmsford last Friday morning, as the House will be aware, Mr. Kybartai was apprehended by the Kybartai was apprehended by the Metropolitan Police on Sunday morning in the Finsbury Park area morning in the Finsbury Park area of my constituency.

He's back where he belongs behind bars and I'd like he belongs behind bars and I'd like to thank the Metropolitan Police, Essex Police and the British Essex Police and the British Transport Police for their swift action to return him to custody and action to return him to custody and the public who helped locate Kabata after the police's appeal. I can tell the House that he will now be transported for deportation back to Ethiopia as quickly as possible. Ethiopia as quickly as possible.

However, this does not change the fact that Mr. Kabatas victims are rightly outraged about what has happened, and I'm livid on their behalf and on behalf of the public. behalf and on behalf of the public. This was a mistake that should not have happened. The victims expect better. The public expects better, and this government expects better from a critical public service, which plays a vital role in our first duty to keep the British people safe and free from harm. Madam Deputy Speaker, on Friday, the 24th of October, Mr.

Kybartai was scheduled to be transferred from HMP Chelmsford to an immigration removal centre from which he was to be deported due to what appears to have been human error. He was instead released into the community at 10:25 a.m. shortly after 12 p.m. concerns were raised about the release to the duty governor, and following checks, staff were dispatched to locate him. When it became clear that he was no longer in the vicinity of the prison, Essex Police were notified and a manhunt began.

Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service instigated an immediate investigation, and I've asked for the initial findings to be with me this week, and the House will appreciate that. In the meantime, there is a limit, obviously, on what I can say, but members will be aware that there are national security considerations within a case like this, and I will update the House in the appropriate way as soon as I can. But what I can say today is that there must and there will be accountability for what has happened.

Madam Deputy Speaker, when I was first informed of the release in error, I spoke immediately to the Deputy Governor at Chelmsford and senior HMP leaders to understand what was known and seek assurances about the immediate measures being taken. I tasked my officials working through the night and coordinated a response with the Home Office and the police, and I'd like to put on record my thanks to the Home Secretary for her engagement over the weekend. Thank you. I also chaired three operational meetings with the police, and on Sunday was able to travel to Woodgreen police station, just outside my constituency, to personally thank the police officers who caught Cabatu.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I've been clear from the outset that a mistake of this nature is unacceptable. We must get to the bottom of what happened and take immediate action to try and prevent similar releases in error to protect the public from harm. First, on Friday, I instructed the CEO of Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service to carry out an urgent review to look at the checks that take place when a prisoner is released, and identify immediate changes that could be made to the process in order to mitigate against the risks of release and error.

As a result, HMPPS have taken steps to make these processes more of us. There will now be more direct senior accountability for ensuring protocols and checks are correctly applied, including a clear checklist for governors to determine that every step has been followed. The evening before any release takes place, these are the strongest release checks that have ever been in place, and they will apply to every release from custody and are effective immediately. Second, any foreign national offender being removed through the Early Removal scheme.

The scheme through which Kabati was supposed to be removed from the country, can now only be discharged when the duty governor is physically present and there will be no ERS removals from HMP Chelmsford for the rest of this week. And third, I am today announcing that there will be an independent investigation by Dame Llinos. I spoke to her yesterday, former Deputy Commissioner for the Metropolitan Police and Director general of the National Crime Agency, and she will fully establish the facts of Kabatas release and whether staff had sufficient experience, training and technology.

And she will also talk to the victims in this case to understand the effect this incident had on them. Her report will highlight points of failure and make recommendations to help prevent further releases in error, which have been rising year on year since 2021, going from nine per month on average in 2023 to 17 per month in the period spanning January to June 2024. And I'm clear that a single release in error is one too many, which is why we have launched this independent investigation.

And I can tell the House that it will have the same status as those into other prison incidents, including the awful attack on three prison officers at HMP Frankland in April of this year and the escape of Daniel Khalife from HMP Wandsworth in 2023. Under the last government. Madam Deputy Speaker releases an error are a symptom of a system that we inherited from the party opposite

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and any response. To it. Jails were full almost to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Jails were full almost to breaking point, and the threat of total collapse in law and order. total collapse in law and order. The fact is that we were left with prisons reeling from historic prisons reeling from historic funding reductions. Madam Deputy funding reductions. Madam Deputy Speaker, a 24% real terms cut from Speaker, a 24% real terms cut from 2010 to 2015 and 30% cuts in staffing, leaving us today with staffing, leaving us today with over 50% of frontline prison officers having less than five officers having less than five years experience.

It's little wonder, then, when the system has wonder, then, when the system has been brought to its knees, that errors like this happen. We must also be honest that the previous also be honest that the previous government's approach to this crisis piecemeal, complex emergency crisis piecemeal, complex emergency releases in the hope that the system wouldn't collapse, has added to a level of complexity and to a level of complexity and pressure that makes errors more likely. This government has been likely. This government has been transparent about the difficult decisions necessary to fix the mess for good, so that prisons can keep us safe, and future governments need not find emergency solutions to free up capacity.

And this government has brought forward the sentencing bill currently making its way through this House. It will ensure we have a suitable criminal justice system which which one which can deliver punishment that works, that cuts crime and keeps the public safe. And this government is also building 14,000, 14,000 additional prison places so that we have capacity to lock up the most dangerous offenders. This is the largest prison expansion since the Victorian era. And let's be clear, there will be more people in prison at the end of this Parliament than there have ever been before.

And we've already built 2500 additional prison places in just over a year, compared to 500 added overall to the prison estate under the Tories. And we're deporting deporting more foreign criminals than the last government. We've changed the law last month to speed up the early removal scheme, something that, to be fair, the shadow justice secretary called for so that most foreign prisoners can now be deported after serving 30% of their custodial sentence rather than the previous 50%. And through the sentencing bill, we will go even further to deport foreign criminals as soon as possible after sentencing.

I can confirm that in the year to July 2025, we sent 5179 foreign national offenders back to the countries of origin, a 14% increase on the previous 12 months. This frees up desperately needed prison places and saves the taxpayer the £54,000 per year in cost to hold an individual offender. Madam Deputy Speaker, this context sets out the scale of the challenge, but I'm clear that releases in error are not simply a fact of life. The public will not accept that and neither does the government.

We'll get to the bottom of what happened in this case. We will take whatever steps necessary to tackle the spike in releases in error, so that we can uphold the first duty of every government to keep the public safe from harm. I commend this statement to the House.
16:48
Robert Jenrick Portrait Rt Hon Robert Jenrick MP (Newark, Conservative)
-
-
I call Robert Jenrick, shadow secretary of State. Hear, hear. Well, dear. Oh dear. Where to begin? This Justice Secretary could not deport the only small boat migrant who wanted. No, who tried to be deported, having been mistakenly released. Came back to prison asking to be deported. Not once, not twice, but five times. But he was turned away. Madam Deputy Speaker, the only illegal migrants this government are stopping are those that actually want to leave the UK.

His officials briefing the press called it the mother of all. Yeah, they're not wrong, are they? Calamity Lammy strikes again. It's a national embarrassment. And today the justice secretary feigns anger at what's happened. He says he is livid. Kybartai was mistakenly let out, but under his plans to abolish short prison sentences that he forced through the Commons last week. Kybartai would never have even stepped foot in prison in the first place. So let's get it straight.

We had the spectacle of the Metropolitan Police scouring London to find a man. The Justice Secretary is simultaneously legislating to avoid sending to prison. What an absolute farce. So, look, I must commend the Justice Secretary's performance. It is truly BAFTA worthy. He has perfected the art of performative outrage to a T. On Wednesday. On Wednesday. Well, look, they may be laughing, but let me finish this point on Wednesday. On Wednesday, he will force every one of his MPs to vote again on the sentencing bill, which will see hundreds of sex offenders just like Kybartai avoid prison altogether.

Sick men who destroy the lives of young girls who steal their childhoods from them. They will be free to roam your communities, to steal the childhoods of your constituents. And I'll tell you who'll be livid then. The British public will be livid, and they'll know who's to blame. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Justice Secretary says he's launched an inquiry into what's happened, but he should be able to provide some basic questions to the House. Now, with respect to the prison in question, HMP Chelmsford.

There's clearly a very significant problem. In a previous internal audit at Chelmsford, officials had had marked their own homework as good, yet inspectors rated it as of serious concern. What is the Justice secretary going to do now to address the way in which problems in our prisons are covered up routinely or wished away? On the subject of the inquiry itself, you won't be surprised to hear I am. How shall I put it, sceptical about this government's ability to conduct inquiries with any competence.

Why is it limiting itself to this particular security farce, and not the other glaring errors, like the doubling of drone sightings above prisons, the soaring assaults on prison officers, or the rampant extremism we're now seeing in our jails? Shocking as this accidental release is, it is not a one off blunder. It has come to be the norm under this government, as the number of prisoners mistakenly let out early has more than doubled. So can the Justice Secretary tell the House how many of the 262 prisoners let out mistakenly in the year to March, were violent or sexual offenders? And how many are still at large? There are now record numbers of foreign nationals clogging up our prisons more than under the last government.

How many of those 262 prisoners accidentally released are migrants like Kaibutsu, who were awaiting deportation? Madam Deputy Speaker, can the Justice Secretary give the House his cast iron assurance that this man will be deported from our country by the end of the week, as he promised on the news on Sunday? And if he fails, will he take responsibility and resign? And lastly, on Tuesday. On Tuesday, the Justice Secretary blocked my amendment to release the migrant crime data. Does he now finally acknowledge that there is a link between the small boats and crime in this country? And will he call the small boat out for what they are, a national security emergency? Madam Deputy Speaker, this man should never have been in our country in the first place.

That's the truth. He should have been detained. He should have been deported. Instead, he was put up in a hotel in Epping and allowed to prey on schoolgirls. Now we learn that some Labour officials privately concede that they were wrong to scrap the Rwanda plan. Be in no doubt. From start to finish, the Kybartai fiasco was a creation entirely of Labour's own making. So I say to the Justice Secretary, there's no point coming to the House today professing to be livid at the consequences of your own policies.

The British people, they can see straight through you.
16:54
David Lammy Portrait Rt Hon David Lammy MP, The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Tottenham, Labour)
-
-
Madam Deputy Speaker, this is a serious issue and that's why that's why there will be a full independent investigation. The shadow justice secretary. I'll give him this. He's smooth. But as my mother would have said, if he was chocolate, he'd lick himself. He should hang his head in shame. The crisis in our prisons that we're faced today is because of 14 years of failure under his government, as they were packing their bags. And he knows this to leave office.

Temporary release failures were under his watch. They presided over 1717 mistaken releases of per month. This didn't happen overnight. It was not inevitable. It was the choices that his party made through 14 years of chaos. They said that they were the government of security and safety. They oversaw rising violent crime and crumbling courts and crumbling prisons. Again and again, they promised 20,000 extra prison places, and they managed an extra 500, 500. In 14 years. They promised to remove more foreign national offenders from prisons.

They failed. They promised investment and expansion in the prison system, but budgets stalled. They promised investment in the police. But again, we saw the police cut by 20,000. They promised increases in access to justice. We did not see that. We saw almost a collapse of legal aid. Violence went up in our prisons, self-harm went up in our prisons, drug abuse went up in our prisons, and prison officer numbers were cut under his watch. And he comes here and has the brass neck, has the brass neck to give the impression that this started just 14 months ago.

Let me just pause there. Let me just pause there. William Fernandez was released in error in March 2021. He was a sexual predator. He raped a 16 year old and sexually assaulted another young woman after he was let out by prison in 2021. Was there an independent investigation? No, not from their side. Rayanne Newby released an error in March 2023. Again, a man who was mistaken released from a category B. Was there an independent investigation under his watch? No there wasn't.

Laura Wallace again released an error in December 2021. Was there any independent investigation? None at all. And he comes here with the brass neck. I've asked Linneaus to look to Owens to look at this. I've asked her if she can do it in eight months. Of course. We'll come back to the house. When? That in eight weeks. Sorry. When that is done. And all of what he has said. What happened? What happened? Looking over this period of time is subject to that review.

And then he says that the sentencing review. Well, actually let more foreign nationals out. He's wrong. We've actually brought down the threshold so that you can now be deported with just a suspended sentence. He knows that. Read clause 42 of the bill and he will understand it properly.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Chair of the Select Committee, Andy Slaughter. Thank you very much, Madam
16:58
16:58
16:59
Jess Brown-Fuller Portrait Jess Brown-Fuller MP (Chichester, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
We in the Liberal Democrats are relieved that karate has been recaptured after what must have been a terrifying few days for his victims and echo the Justice Secretary's remarks thanking Essex Police, the Metropolitan Police and British Transport Police. But, Madam Deputy Speaker, his recapture doesn't excuse the serious mistakes that caused this to happen in the first place. It's totally unacceptable that the safety of the public was ever put at risk. HMP Chelmsford is a remand prison, one that regularly deals with prisoners coming and going, and therefore should be entirely capable of handling situations like this.

Yet we know from His Majesty's Chief Inspector of Prisons that there are deep seated inadequacies at Chelmsford, including inexperienced staff and a lack of adequate training, especially identified in pre-release documents. At the same time, we have seen worrying trends nationally in mistaken prisoner releases, with 262 prisoners released by accident in the year 2025, up from 115 the year prior. So we in the Liberal Democrats do recognise that the government inherited a mess when it comes to prisons, but they should have taken serious steps to address the shortfalls and staffing issues in prisons, which are now clearly putting the public at risk.

So I would like to ask the Secretary of State what steps his government is taking to address work, culture and training issues in our prisons, especially those like HMP Chelmsford, where concerns have already been raised in the past. I welcome the Secretary of State's announcement of an independent investigation following repeated calls by my hon. Friend, the member for Chelmsford, whose constituents were put at risk. But can he confirm what consequences those found at fault will face and pending the outcome of the investigation? Does he agree that anyone responsible should face the sack? Does he believe that the new safeguards that he is putting in place will prevent this from ever happening again? And finally, for victims who will have spent the weekend incredibly distressed, what support was provided to those victims and their families over the weekend when they were aware of the perpetrator being at large? And will that support continue?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

On Mr. Well, I'm very grateful to the
17:01
David Lammy Portrait Rt Hon David Lammy MP, The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Tottenham, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, I'm very grateful to the honourable lady for the tone of her remarks, and she's absolutely she's remarks, and she's absolutely she's she's she's absolutely right that it was entirely unacceptable. And understandably, the victims of those crimes would have been very, very anxious in their families over the course of the weekend. And the public at large would have, would have asked, particularly women and children. She is right. However, that there are issues because we now have 50% of staff in our prisons who are effectively new on the job as a result of what we inherited, and it is important that we give them the appropriate support and training over this period.

She knows, because I've said it from this dispatch box, that it's our intention to grow the number of prison places and to build new prisons, 14,000 places by 2031. And in that context, it's important that we grow the number of officers as well and support them. She knows, too, the importance of probation in this context, and the 700 million that we've allocated to support our probation service at this time is really important. She will recognise that in a system that releases 57,000 prisoners every year, that many of those prisoners are released appropriately under licence.

Some of those prisoners are reporting to probation. They're reporting to home. They're reporting for tags, and many of them are proportion that's gone up, are reporting for early removal. And it's for all of those reasons, it's important that Lynn Owers gets

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the bottom of what happened in this circumstance. Matt Bishop. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
17:03
17:04
17:05
17:05
17:06
17:07
17:07
17:08
17:09
17:10
17:10
17:11
17:12
17:13
17:14
17:14
17:15
17:16
17:17
17:17
17:18
17:18
17:19
17:20
17:21
17:22
17:23
17:23
17:24
17:25
17:26
17:26
17:27
17:27
17:28
17:28
17:29
17:30
17:30
17:30
17:31
Mark Pritchard Portrait Rt Hon Mark Pritchard MP (The Wrekin, Conservative)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

To the Justice. Secretary it. Is wearing a bit thin, referring to the last government's record.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

This government has been in power for over. 12 months, so. It just isn't going to. Wash with. The British public. Can I.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The British public. Can I. Also say to. The Justice Secretary, I think he does his calm better than he he does his calm better than he does his. He mentions. To my hon. Friend, the member for North Dorset. I think he. Paraphrased his own statement, but his statement clearly says that he did share exact words. Over the weekend I chaired not one, but three operational meetings with the police and members across this House on all sides of the House will know we can attend strategy meetings, but we never interfere with operational matters.

So I think the the House and members of the public and indeed police officers around this country deserve more clarity on that. And finally, Madam Speaker, if I may, it says in a statement page two members will also be aware that there are national security considerations with a case like this. What are those? National security considerations? It's a bit confusing. First time I've heard this is an open court criminal conviction. So what are the national security implications? And finally, just so he knows, I haven't gone too tough on him today.

Can I commend his decision to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

appoint Dame Lynne Owens, a first class public servant? Yeah. Secretary of state.
17:32
17:33
17:33
17:34
17:35
17:35
17:35
17:37
17:37
17:37
17:37
17:38
17:38
17:39
17:39
17:40
17:40
17:40
17:40
17:41
17:41
17:42
17:42
Kim Johnson Portrait Kim Johnson MP (Liverpool Riverside, Labour)
-
-
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I have a point of order on the same person for a different point. I rise on a point of order to raise a matter of both parliamentary courtesy and political accountability. I have been informed that the member for Runcorn and Helsby last week held a political meeting in my Liverpool Riverside constituency without any prior notification to me. I have informed the member that I would be raising this as a point of order, and while there is no formal rule preventing members from visiting other constituencies, it is a fundamental convention of this House that MPs respect the local representation of their colleagues and notify them before seeking to engage with their constituents.

They know they are not welcome. Coming into my constituency, staring hate and division, to ignore this convention of the House is discourteous to do so. In a city like mine, with a very long and proud history of diversity, is politically provocative. I call on the House to recognise that such actions undermine the norms of mutual respect between members, and disregard the rights of constituents to be represented by their elected MP. The people of Liverpool Riverside do not welcome this opportunistic political activity.

Does the speaker, Deputy Speaker, agree with me that this matter requires urgent attention? And can she reaffirm? Can the Deputy leader of the House reaffirm the principle that parliamentary conventions and respect for local

**** Possible New Speaker ****

representation must be upheld by all members? I thank the honourable member
17:44
17:44
17:45
17:46
None Portrait Royal Assent
-

Victims and courts.
17:46
17:46
Alex Davies-Jones Portrait Alex Davies-Jones MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Pontypridd, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Clause 13. Minister. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is truly an honour to open this debate and to bring the Victims and debate and to bring the Victims and Courts Bill before the House. This bill is about people, victims who have suffered unimaginable trauma, their families and ensuring that they receive justice. It is about restoring faith in our justice system that can often feel cold and confusing, and this delivers on this government's driving mission for safer streets, making sure victims are supported, that offenders are held to account, and that justice is delivered swiftly and fairly.

The deep rooted issues in our criminal justice system need no repeating here. The House knows that this is a system that requires large scale reform after years of neglect. There is a long road ahead, but this bill takes an important step forward. Here at its core, our victims experiences. This government is bringing forward real, tangible measures to ensure that victims voices are heard, that their needs are recognised and that their rights are respected. This will strengthen our courts improving efficiency and fairness across the system.

Madam Deputy Speaker, these are much needed changes and I am deeply grateful to honourable and Right Honourable members on all sides of this House for their time, their insight and considering them, and indeed to all of the organisations, advocates and survivors who have shared their experiences and helped us shape this legislation. I am sure the House will therefore join me in paying tribute to the families of Jan Mustafa, Olivia Pratt-korbel, Zara Aleena and Sabina Nessa and I would like to welcome to this place Aisha Hussain, Cheryl Cobell and Antonia Ellison.

They are in the public gallery today. I would also like to thank Sabina Islam Farinaz, the justice for victims group, which includes Susan and Jeremy Everard, Glenn and Becky Younis, Katie Brett, Paula Hudgell, Aisha Hussain, the Bethan family all for their courage and strength in campaigning amongst immense grief for their loved ones. Three government amendments at Report Stage have further strengthened this bill, delivering clearer, stronger protection for victims. And I will turn to these briefly now and again.

Thank you all to everyone who has worked so constructively with me and officials in the Ministry of Justice to discuss the issues and concerns. New clause 14 and amendments 12 to 21 restrict the exercise of parental responsibility for perpetrators of rape, where their crime has resulted in the birth of a child. This amendment will, of course, protect children, but it will also help shield the victim from their perpetrator interfering in their lives. Because those who commit this horrific crime should clearly never be able to use parental rights to control or torment their victim.

I would like to take a moment to pay tribute to a woman I am proud to call my colleague, and even prouder to call my friend. Many in this House will already have deep admiration for the member for Bolsover, and I want to place on record that this change is hers. It is for her, her children and those just like them up and down the country that she has dedicated her life to fighting tirelessly for. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Minister for giving way. I want to add my personal admiration to the member for admiration to the member for Bolsover, who has been a fantastic champion for this particular new clause. She, her predecessor in this house, was called the Beast of Bolsover. I think she's the brave Bolsover because every time she

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Bolsover because every time she speaks in this house she's incredibly brave and I want to pay tribute to her here. Here. I echo those sentiments

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Here. I echo those sentiments entirely. It has genuinely been my privilege to hear her story and to privilege to hear her story and to work with her to ensure that this measure works, to stop rapists taking an active role in a child's taking an active role in a child's life. When that child was conceived as a result of rape, I cannot imagine the enormous complexity imagine the enormous complexity that mothers such as her face in this situation, and I am in awe of this situation, and I am in awe of her bravery and that of so many others.

This measure will ensure that rapists cannot take active that rapists cannot take active steps in a child's life where that child has been conceived as a result of the crime that they have been convicted for, and in order to been convicted for, and in order to protect as many children as possible. Our measure features a two track process where the Crown two track process where the Crown Court is satisfied that the child was conceived of rape. It must make a prohibited steps order restricting the offender's parental responsibility unless it is not in the interests of justice to do so.

We recognise that rape can occur within an abusive relationship, and this may make it difficult to prove at a criminal trial that it actually led to the child's conception where this is the case. But the court considers the rape may have led to the conception of the child. It will refer the matter to the family court via the local authority. This two track process sends a clear message that we will protect all children born of rape, no matter the circumstances. The government recognises the clear risk that serious child sex offenders pose to their children, and that is why we have brought forward amendment ten, which will expand clause three of the bill.

It means that when someone is sentenced to four or more years for serious child sexual abuse against any child, the courts will automatically restrict their parental responsibility. The process will remain the same at the point an offender is sentenced, the Crown Court will be required to make a prohibited steps order, restricting the offender's exercise of parental responsibility for all the children for whom they hold. For an offender to be in scope of this measure, they will have to have demonstrated that they are unable to protect children and consider their welfare.

That is why our measure includes all serious child sexual abuse offences against all child. And unlike the previous government's plans in the Criminal Justice Bill, this is not just limited to the offence of child rape. What is more, unlike the previous government, this government will actually deliver it. We are taking this important step today to protect even more children by preventing these individuals from taking active steps in their children's lives. We have recognised the strength of feeling on this issue and I am grateful to my to my friends, the members especially.

As already mentioned, my honourable friend the member for Bolsover, but also to my honourable friend, the member for Lowestoft, the member for Dwyfor Meirionnydd and Baroness Harman. In the other place, they have been unwavering in their advocacy for the protection of children. Safeguarding children is of the utmost importance to this government and this amendment ensures that we are doing just that here.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

She just mentioned some. Pioneering women. In. This place. Who've campaigned on this very.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Who've campaigned on this very. Issue for a number. Of years, but today's. Amendment stands. On. The shoulders of. The. Brave victims.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Brave victims. And survivors. Who've spoken out over so long as well. This corrects a. Historic injustice. Whereby convicted sex.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Whereby convicted sex. Offenders and paedophiles. Are children. Are protected. From them. But before.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

But before. Now their own children are not. And this. Government is now. Taking steps. To make sure. Children who.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Children who. own. And their. Parents are. Protected from these. Vile sex offenders.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My right Honourable friend is right. This bill is a testament to the victims and survivors, those brave victims and survivors who brave victims and survivors who have spoken out about this injustice. And it is this government that is correcting that. My right hon. Friend also talks My right hon. Friend also talks about standing on the shoulders of brave, brilliant women in this place who have come before us and place who have come before us and are still here, and it is quite apt now that I would also like to pay tribute to her, because a new clause 13 concerning the misuse of non-disclosure agreements, known as NDAs, is a testament to her NDAs, is a testament to her brilliant campaigning on this work.

The government is very clear that NDAs must not be used to silence NDAs must not be used to silence victims or witnesses of crime. Victims must be free to tell their truth, to seek help and to warn others. New clause 13 will void NDAs to the extent that they seek to prevent a victim or a witness from speaking about criminal conduct to anyone and for any purpose. It will also protect disclosures about how the other party responded to the conduct or allegation, so that victims are not prevented from sharing that full context of their experience.

This measure builds on the Employment Rights Bill, which addresses the use of NDAs in cases of workplace harassment and discrimination. The measure will bind the Crown, but it will not apply to a very narrow cohort of specified agreements for national security reasons. It includes regulation making powers to define accepted NDAs, where both parties genuinely wish to retain confidentiality, and to ensure that certain disclosures will always be permitted once commenced. This measure will replace section 17 of the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024, which allows limited disclosures to certain bodies.

Together with the Employment Rights Bill, we are taking the necessary steps to ensure that NDAs cannot be misused to silence victims or obstruct justice. And now, Madam Deputy Speaker, I'd like to briefly address a number of other concerns that have been raised and tabled as amendments. I will not pre-empt what will be said today in the debate, and I will give honourable and right honourable members the time to make their cases. However, I again thank those on all sides of the House for engaging with me and setting out their concerns.

Turning to the amendment tabled by my honourable friend from Bristol East, which seeks to place a statutory duty on the Crown Court and HMCTS to determine whether an offender has parental responsibility for a child following sentencing. The amendment is very well intentioned, but it does risk creating practical difficulties in determining whether a person holds parental responsibility, has dependent children or children living in their household, may require interpretation of family court orders, birth records, or informal caregiving arrangements. These are matters for the Family Court.

Imposing such a duty on the Crown Court risks delaying sentencing. This government made a manifesto commitment to identify and provide support for children affected by parental imprisonment, and the Ministry of Justice and Department for education are committed to working together to determine the best way forward to do this and deliver on that commitment, to make sure that every child gets the support that they need. The Right Honourable Member for Newark and the Honourable member for Chichester have tabled amendments to remove the four year custodial threshold that applies to clause three and to expand the number of cases where clause three will apply.

I want to be clear this measure is not simply about when parental responsibility should be restricted. It is about when that restriction should happen automatically. We need to be mindful that this is a very novel measure. Removing the threshold would add a very large number of cases to what is an untested approach. More cases will also mean more applications to the Family court, and it is important that we do not overwhelm the court and create delays, which will put the vulnerable children already in the system at further risk.

We want to be sure that there are no adverse consequences for those children and their families already in the family court, and that is why we have struck to keep this measure narrow, so we can understand exactly how it is working in practice and what those impacts are. As I said at second reading and through the passage of this bill committee, this is just the beginning. As part of implementing these measures, we will seek to understand how they operate in practice and ensure that they are clear routes through the Family Court for parental responsibility of any perpetrator who does not fall into this measure to be restricted.

The Right Honourable Member for Newark has also tabled amendments on the Unduly Lenient Sentencing Scheme. Parliament intended the ULS scheme to be an exceptional power, and I recognise the importance of finality and sentencing to avoid ongoing uncertainty for victims, those convicted and society more broadly about the sentence to be served. However, I do recognise the exceptionally difficult circumstances for victims and their families in making a referral to the Attorney General within the 28 day limit. The Law Commission is carrying out a review of criminal appeals and held a public consultation which sought views from a range of different individuals and reforms to the ULS scheme.

It did include extending the time limit and offences in scope. The government will, of course, carefully consider the review's final recommendations. However, today I want to assure members from across the House that I have heard the strength of feeling on the unduly lenient sentencing scheme. The amendments have been tabled on this matter, raised very important issues, and I will be continuing to look at this carefully as it progresses to the other place on that, I make a commitment.

The honourable member for Newark has also tabled an amendment on victim personal statements, a topic on which I must also pay tribute to my honourable friend, the member for the forest of Dean, for his dedicated campaigning on victim. Personal statements can be an incredibly powerful way for victims and their families to tell the court how the crime has impacted them, and for the court to directly her evidence about the harm caused when considering its sentencing of the offender. This is the victim's voice in the courtroom.

It is important to understand that these statements are evidence submitted to the court to assist the court in determining sentences as evidence. They are subject to strict rules, which the court applies to ensure that the criminal justice process works fairly and effectively, and that is why the content is limited to explaining the impact of this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

crime. However, I will happily give way. The Minister for giving way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The Minister for giving way. It takes me back to a family and the father of young Violet Grace, the father of young Violet Grace, who was killed in 2017, four years old, 80 miles an hour in a 30 mile old, 80 miles an hour in a 30 mile zone and the people involved went missing. And during the court case missing. And during the court case missing. And during the court case some years later. Now. During the statements, during the reading, they wanted to read out the they wanted to read out the victim's statement fully in the court, and the defendant's barrister objected, and the judge accepted that objection.

The barrister gave the parents, the CPS barrister gave the parents a copy of the victim's statement, highlighted with what they could not say. They went out of the courtroom to alter their statement. This was a young couple with a This was a young couple with a younger child. It was horrendous. What happened to victim to Violet What happened to victim to Violet and her mother and all of life's impact on her life was just horrendous. They went into that court and they felt like the criminal.

They felt like they were the defendants. They felt that they were doing wrong. And they then were asking, what can we say? What can we not say? The father has texted me this morning and he said, thank you, Mary. After all these years, I can see some light in the future. We don't want other people to suffer this, and I do hope that this goes through and that we can get something that this family, we've now got another little girl for.

I just want to thank this government for getting round to it, because these bills been going through and that's been going through, and it's just so terribly traumatic. The whole town feel for these parents. Thank you so much.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The Violet Grace's parents. Yeah. Can I thank my hon. Friend for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I thank my hon. Friend for raising the case of Violet Grace. She has been a tireless campaigner and supporter of the family for and supporter of the family for many years. I have had the privilege of meeting the family several times and hearing directly several times and hearing directly how their experience of their victim impact statement and the limitations placed on them as to what they could say in court, has affected them and essentially silenced them, and meant that their silenced them, and meant that their pain was not heard by the perpetrator.

I am committed to working with them and the other working with them and the other families for justice campaign. My the honourable member opposite. We've had extensive conversations on this, and any honourable member on this, and any honourable member in this House on looking for a way forward as to how we ensure that the victim's voice is best the victim's voice is best represented in sentencing. We do not need legislation for this, Madam Deputy Speaker. In fact, Madam Deputy Speaker. In fact, legislation could potentially make this worse in terms of retraumatising victims by making them, say, two separate statements limiting in statute even further the parameters of what can be said.

the parameters of what can be said. I do not want to limit or silence any victims. I want to work with them to ensure that there is them to ensure that there is universality. There is support for them when completing their victim impact statements, and that the guidance is there so that anyone knows exactly what can be said in that impact statement. It is vitally important that we give victims a voice, and I am determined to achieve that. I know that my hon. Friend the member for Lowestoft, will speak to her amendment to place a duty on certain authorities to commission specific support services for victims and caregivers of victims of abuse and exploitation.

Again, this is well intentioned, but we do not agree that it is helpful to place a statutory obligation on certain authorities to commission certain support services. The Moj already provides grant funding to police and crime Commissioners that is used to commission support services for victims of abuse and exploitation, which includes ring fenced funding for sexual violence and domestic abuse services. It is for the PCCs to determine what support is there for their local area. However, I again remain committed to working with her and others to ensure that victims get the best support that they need.

My hon. Friend, the member for Rotherham, has tabled an amendment which seeks to reform the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme in relation to compensating victims of child sexual abuse. This government is, of course, absolutely committed to supporting victims. However, we believe that reforming the scheme in one way that only benefits victims of child sexual abuse or any other single crime type, would undermine its principle of universality. My hon. Friend the member for Rotherham and I, as well as my hon. Friend the member for Warrington North and the member for Birmingham Northfield and all of those who attended the Westminster Hall debate we had earlier this year will know the strength of feeling towards the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme.

It is not working. It needs reform and I am committed to working with them and others and victims and survivors to not make this piecemeal and to look at how we can make it the most effective and sustainable scheme to provide compensation to victims. The honourable member for Maidenhead will no doubt speak to his amendment on support for families bereaved by homicide abroad. Bereaved families will in many instances need support tailored to their case. We have heard that these families need to be clearer about what that offer from UK agencies are and what the Homicide Service even is, and how to access it.

That is why we are working with departments across government agencies and the Victims Commissioner to produce a clear, accessible guide to support families bereaved by homicide abroad. I am very grateful to the charity Murdered Abroad for working alongside us to make sure that that guidance delivers on its aims, and we help those families who are stuck in limbo. I will come to a close by emphasising again the importance of this bill. It is a foundation for a better justice system, one that provides even greater protection for victims and delivers swifter, more efficient justice.

It will not solve every issue we face overnight, but it is a strong, determined step forward, a signal that this government stands shoulder to shoulder with victims. And again, I want to sincerely thank members on all sides of this House for their engagement with this bill. We work together in this place, and this place is at its best when we do come together for the sake of victims and survivors. And I look forward to hearing this debate and responding to all of the views.

And I'm looking forward to really healthy debate for now. I commend the government amendments and new

**** Possible New Speaker ****

clauses to this House. NC 13 victims rights to make disclosures relating to criminal

**** Possible New Speaker ****

conduct. The question is that government new clause 13 be read a second time.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

new clause 13 be read a second time. I call Liberal Democrat spokesperson Jess Brown Fuller. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The cornerstone of our justice system should always be the support and protection of victims and survivors, ensuring that those that survivors, ensuring that those that have suffered at the hands of others can go on to live a life without fear, and not defined by without fear, and not defined by the actions of those who harmed them. And this is achieved by putting victims and survivors needs at the heart of the justice process, at the heart of the justice process, ensuring that justice is served and seen to be served swiftly through properly funded support and both properly funded support and both protection and rehabilitation must be robust and effective.

All of this has underpinned many of the issues that victims and survivors currently face, that fill our local
18:07
Jess Brown-Fuller Portrait Jess Brown-Fuller MP (Chichester, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
surgery appointments and our inboxes, often with harrowing accounts of a system failure that continues to compound their trauma. And we recognise that this Labour government is having to untangle this mess. The court backlogs which delay justice. Prison overcrowding, releasing criminals onto the streets without warning, and the hollowing out of support services that victims rely on. So we in the Liberal Democrats, therefore welcome the intention and many of the measures in this bill aimed at ensuring that victims are listened to and that their experience in the system improves.

In particular, we welcome the bill's measures, compelling offenders to attend their sentencing hearings. This is for many victims seeing justice done an important aspect of the process a moment of closure or for some, the beginning of their recovery, something that more often than not, they've waited far too long to actually see, ensuring that offenders are seen to face the consequences of their actions is vital for a lot of victims journeys. We also welcome the provisions to restrict parental responsibility in instances of rape or sexual assault against a child, both in the bill and in the government's amendments, including when a child is conceived after a rape and when an offender has parental responsibility for any child.

And I give credit to the honourable member for Bolsover for being a tireless advocate for this and also for being so brave in sharing her personal story. And this was something that my hon. Friends for North East Hampshire and South Devon also called for at the bill committee stage, and it's been a long standing campaign for families and victims across the country. And it's very reassuring that the justice secretary and the victims minister have heard their calls, picked this up and made it an important part of the bill.

We're also really pleased to hear about the victims helpline, which could provide valuable support for so many, although we do remain concerned about the sufficiency of the resources behind this to make the service genuinely effective. And I'd appreciate further clarity from the Minister on the resources that are being made available for this helpline. Likewise, the extension of the powers of the Victims Commissioner is also a constructive move, empowering them to work on behalf of victims when a case is in the public interest is important for improving the experience of victims and witnesses and most importantly, learning lessons for the future, which government successive governments have not been very good at doing.

We also do believe there are gaps in the provisions of this bill that could be improved upon, and these have formed the basis for our amendments. But I'm pleased to hear the Minister say that this is not the end of the journey, and this is us laying out where we'd like to see this go. So to that end, New clause seven seeks to extend the victim contact scheme, repairing some of the gaps in provision, ensuring that victims have information about offenders, how they can apply for licence conditions, provide statements to parole hearings and appeal decisions is vital for victims journeys after a crime and for their feeling of safety.

We therefore believe that the scheme should be extended to victims of offenders serving less than 12 months for violent or sexual offences to victims, in cases involving coercive or controlling behaviour, stalking or harassment, and to bereaved families in manslaughter or death by dangerous driving cases. New clause eight would ensure that victims of criminal offences are entitled to free court transcripts, something that should be universal to ensure transparency and an accessible method of processing a court case for all those involved in a criminal justice system.

When so much that happens in a court trial feels like a foreign language to so many, accessing it, being able to process it afterwards. I know that my honourable friend for Richmond Park has done exemplary work on this topic, and that the issue has support across the house, notably in a conservative amendment. Despite their decision to ignore it during the decade they were in charge of the Ministry of Justice, the roll out of free court transcripts for victims of rape is a welcome step, but should not be the end of our ambition to ensure that all victims can have this important document.

Following a trial, a new clause 21 requires the Secretary of State for justice to make a statement to the House within two weeks of the publication of any review, report or inquiry into the experiences of victims, including those produced by the victims Commissioner. When things do go wrong in serious cases where hundreds, perhaps thousands, have been let down by the justice system, it is vital that the country sees acknowledgement, apology and action from the relevant authorities, including the government, and this new clause would give honourable members across the across the country the opportunity to scrutinise the government's response.

In all instances. A new clause 19 specifically mandates local authorities to prepare strategies for victim support to ensure there are no postcode lotteries of support services relating to domestic abuse, sexual offences and child exploitation, and new clause 20 requires relevant authorities to prepare an annual report on the availability and adequacy of support services for carers of victims of domestic abuse and sexual assault. These services are essential for victims finding pathways to moving on from those horrific crimes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The honourable. Member give. Way happily give way. I thank the member for giving

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the member for giving way this bill. Supportive domestic abuse survivors is very welcome, but it is only half the story in but it is only half the story in Horsham. One of my constituents arrived at court to see her abuser stand trial, only to be told at the stand trial, only to be told at the court courthouse door that the case was pulled due to a lack of capacity. That trial was delayed capacity. That trial was delayed for two years, by which time her abuser breached two restraining abuser breached two restraining orders.

So would the honourable member agree that unless we see concrete measures to improve capacity above and beyond the recent increase in sitting days, then this Bill cannot fulfil its

**** Possible New Speaker ****

promise to the public. I thank my honourable friend for his intervention and also for his intervention and also for highlighting the impact that court delays have on victims, and I think it's an opinion shared across the House that it's totally unacceptable when a victim arrives to have their day in court and then gets sent away. And I know that the government, the reason we have a lot of legislation coming through at the moment is because they are at the moment is because they are trying to address this from multiple different angles, and I hope to see ambition in the area.

I would also like to just briefly would also like to just briefly highlight the work of my hon. Friend the member for Maidenhead and new clause 12, which requires necessary updates to the victims code for relatives of victims of murder or manslaughter whose loved ones have been murdered abroad, who currently sit outside of the victims code. Although this affects around 80 families annually, the toll on falling outside of scope and receiving little to no support or not knowing where to go to get the support is unacceptable.

As has been outlined, we in the Liberal Democrats are concerned about gaps in this bill and believe that more can be done to support victims and survivors, but we recognise the ambition that is that is behind it, and we urge the government to take on board our amendments to better

**** Possible New Speaker ****

protect victims and survivors. Thank you. Yeah. I call Carrie McCarthy. Thank

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I call Carrie McCarthy. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. In the interests of time, I will focus only on new clause two, which focus only on new clause two, which is in my name, though I am also supporting the backbench new clauses one, ten and 11. And I very clauses one, ten and 11. And I very much welcome, of course, the government's new clause 14. And I do want to thank the right hon. Member for Billericay, who originally tabled this amendment. His subsequent elevation to the Shadow Cabinet means that he's had Shadow Cabinet means that he's had to withdraw his name.

On the 21st of May, 2024. I introduced the Children Parental Imprisonment Bill Children Parental Imprisonment Bill with immaculate timing. As it turned out, as the general election was called the next day. And I was delighted that despite the latest lateness of the hour, I managed to have a quick word with somebody have a quick word with somebody from the leader of the opposition's office and a commitment to identify and support such children made it and support such children made it into the Labour election manifesto.

I would rather the commitment in the quite been the quite been framed the way it was, which was about breaking the cycle of only one factor. But to focus solely on one factor. But to focus solely on that risks adding to the stigma and shame that's often felt by children in this situation. But the important thing was that the commitment was there. At the time, we did not know how many children had a parent in prison, with most figures based on out-of-date research or unreliable estimates.
18:16
Kerry McCarthy Portrait Kerry McCarthy MP (Bristol East, Labour)
-
-
But 13 days after Labour was elected into government, we did see the publication of an official the publication of an official estimate, and I know that we were quick off the mark as a new government, but that was based on government, but that was based on work that due to lots of lobbying and campaigning, and we'd managed to get the previous government to to get the previous government to agree to, they set up something called the Better Outcomes through Linked Data Project. And through Linked Data Project.

And through that, we now know that around 190,000 or so children are affected 190,000 or so children are affected by parental imprisonment each year, which is a huge number. But this is still only a ballpark figure. It still only a ballpark figure. It doesn't tell us where in the country these children are, who's looking after them, whether they're getting support, what trauma getting support, what trauma they're going through, and in far too many cases, how long they have been coping completely on their own. been coping completely on their own.

My bill called on the government to set up a statutory mechanism so that at the point when an adult is sentenced to imprisonment, efforts are made to find out whether they have any children at home and, if so, whether those children are being taken care of. And that is what this new clause two also seeks to achieve. And I was, I have to say, a little disappointed by the Minister's reply is I think it rather misses the point of what rather misses the point of what we're actually trying to do in this clause.

It's nothing to do with making a judgement as to who's got parental responsibility or not. The clause actually says that it's the court should look at whether the offender has a dependent child, parental responsibility, or a child living in their household. It talks about responsibility for or contact with, so there's no legal decision that needs to be made as to whether that that parent is the sole carer or responsible for it. It's just whether there is a child in the picture and I know the minister says, and I very much believe that she's she's passionate about this issue.

I know she's met with the excellent charity children heard and seen, for example, I know she wants to act, but 16 months on from the general election, there are still no timelines as to when identification and support will be brought forward for these invisible children. And I do want to make something very clear that this is about the welfare of children. It's not about the prisoners. There is important work to be done on the rehabilitation of prisoners. And we're fortunate to have an excellent prisons minister who totally gets that.

And it's been shown by research that maintaining family ties for prisoners is very much part of that rehabilitation. But that is not what we're talking about here today. I'm concerned with the welfare of the children and specific child focussed support for those with a family member in prison, whether they have contact with that parent or not. And we shouldn't conflate the two. And I'm concerned that the Moj does, which is in part because its responsibilities and its funding streams are all focussed around prisons and prisoners.

Whereas in the Department for education, there's a risk that these children get lost in the mix amongst other children that are suffering adverse childhood experiences. In their responses to me, ministers have highlighted the working together to safeguard safeguard Children multi-agency working statutory guidance published under the last government in 2023. This guidance says that prisons need arrangements in place that take prisoners children's needs into account. It recommends that on the first night of a prisoner's sentence, they are to be supported to make suitable care arrangements for any dependent children with involvement of children's social care services where needed.

It advises the Prison Service to ask all prisoners during their custody screening whether they have caring responsibilities for children under the age of 18. The inclusion of this in the guidance was positive, but it doesn't address the effect that some prisoners deliberately avoid revealing that they have children at home. Children heard at seem. The charity I mentioned previously report that some parents are scared of their children being taken away by social services, so much so that they don't tell anyone else.

Also, the prisoner in question might not have caring responsibilities. They might not even have contact anymore with the child. It might be that they've been convicted of domestic violence against the child's mother. It might be that they've been convicted of sexual abuse or offences against the children themselves. But it is still important in terms of the trauma that that child will be going through the stigma, the shame. I've heard so many cases where children have sex offenders, their homes are targeted, they've been driven out of where they live, they've been humiliated at school, they've had to move town and change their names because of what? They're hugely the father, but because of what their imprisoned parent has done.

The government's keeping children safe in education. Statutory guidance for Schools and Colleges, which was published in September, rightly notes that children with family members in prison are at higher risk of poorer outcomes, including poverty, stigma, isolation and poor mental health. It signposts the National Information Centre on Children of Offenders as a source of support for school staff helping children with a parent in prison. But this is not being properly maintained and that has been the case for years. Many of the resources it redirects to no longer work, but families and professionals are still being referred.

There. On the Moj side, the government published a multidisciplinary training offer tender for professionals on the impact of parental imprisonment. However, this tender was taken down and the department won't clarify why or when it will go back up. In the meantime, children are still being left without support. So given that all prisoners have contacts with His Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service, there is a missed opportunity here for early identification of children. It won't necessarily pick all of them up, but it's a really good step forward.

This amendment would go further than current guidance in instructing courts to determine whether prisoners have children to ensure they're protected. This could include using official data and working more closely with councils, local authorities, as well as speaking to the offender directly about how that child can be looked after. It could also involve working with schools. It would present another opportunity for prisoners to report children at home before they enter the prison estate. The more opportunities prisoners are given to do this, the more likely they are to tell officials.

And again, I've heard accounts of whether there's one count that particularly stuck with me, where a woman had been in prison for, I think it was about four months, and she actually revealed to her she was having a counselling session or something, and she revealed that she actually had children of school age that were left behind at home by themselves. It could also bring forward a structure and process for having these conversations, to reassure prisoners that informing the authorities about any children at home is the right thing to do for their child.

Statutory guidance is non-binding, official advice and cannot carry the force of the law. This will instruct the relevant agencies to go further in their legal duty to protect children. As I said, it won't catch all children, but it will be a major step forward. And I can ask the minister, or can I ask the minister in reply, if

**** Possible New Speaker ****

we're not going to do it this way, how are we going to do it? Sir Joshua Reynolds. Thank you, Madam.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Deputy Speaker. I wish to speak to my. New clause 12. Now, each year, hundreds of families get the knock hundreds of families get the knock on the door from the police, who must deliver the worst news that a family can ever hear. The news that one of their closest relatives has been murdered. But for around 80 families each year, they receive the news that a family member of theirs has been murdered whilst abroad. This can be done by a police officer, but often the news comes from a journalist or in a newspaper, where they found out and newspaper, where they found out and reached out to a family directly.

In many cases, when British citizens are murdered abroad, their citizens are murdered abroad, their families are left to deal with unimaginable grief for their loved one, all whilst facing the full one, all whilst facing the full weight of an unfamiliar, bureaucratic and different system. They do that alone. They have to They do that alone. They have to navigate foreign legal procedures, untranslated documents and distant court proceedings with patchy, inconsistent support from their government, all at a time of trauma, vulnerability and mourning.

This is where new laws 12 comes in. New clause 12 seeks to add an appendix clause 12 seeks to add an appendix to the victims code so that a group of bereaved families who currently fall through the cracks in our system no longer fall through the cracks. The principle underpinning this bill is clear victims deserve to be at the heart of our criminal justice system. They deserve information, they deserve support, and they deserve the opportunity to
18:25
Joshua Reynolds Portrait Mr Joshua Reynolds MP (Maidenhead, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
be heard. These aren't privileges. They're fundamental rights that we They're fundamental rights that we have. Yet there really is a cruel anomaly. Anomaly? If a British citizen is murdered on British soil, citizen is murdered on British soil, their family receives structured statutory support through victim liaison officers, aid court liaison officers, aid court procedures and counselling services. But if the same British citizen is murdered abroad whilst on holiday, working or studying in another country, their family are so often left to navigate an overwhelming left to navigate an overwhelming maze of foreign bureaucracy, often a language they don't speak, with inconsistent and inadequate inconsistent and inadequate information from the government that should be standing behind them.

Ruth's sister Faye was killed in Ruth's sister Faye was killed in 2019 whilst in Nigeria, where she was working for an NGO. She was was working for an NGO. She was shot alongside her boyfriend in a double homicide. Ruth and her family were left to deal with an overwhelming number of agencies overwhelming number of agencies without proper support, to understand whose responsibility was what with limited communication and what with limited communication and poor casework, consistency from the British authorities, vital information such as the arrest and information such as the arrest and subsequent death of a suspect in custody, which the Fcdo knew about, took years to reach Ruth and her took years to reach Ruth and her family.

They've still not obtained full and accurate account of what occurred on the night of Faye's murder. Alison and Paul's son Danny was murdered in Amsterdam in 2022, aged just 22 years old. Alison and Paul explained how navigating the lengthy and complex Dutch judicial procedures in a foreign language, whilst having to arrange matters such as repatriation without any support, was an immense challenge. They described being in a state of trauma and turmoil, uncertain about how they managed to endure the circumstances, they outlined how the stress took a significant toll on both them and on their daughter.

Theresa's husband Stephen was killed in a violent attack by a gang whilst on holiday in Spain in 2009. His two teenage sons sustained permanent injuries from the attack. Stephen's body was repatriated to the UK and was held by the coroner in a mortuary for eight years before the inquest was held. The inquest concluded with a verdict of unlawful killing, at which time the body was released to his wife and children. Eight years after his death, Stephen's family received no support from the UK in terms of repatriation, travel, understanding the trial in a foreign country in a foreign language.

His wife Theresa accounted that whole for her and her family. They've been living through a nightmare, not only of having to having to having to navigate the complex judicial system in Spain, but how they felt retraumatised by the lack of support that they received. Andrew's son was murdered abroad when he was 18 years old. He says that despite the Fcdo having a duty to care for its citizens, the family received minimal support. The Fcdo provided poor and inconsistent communication, leaving the family without clear updates during critical stages.

The family was forced to navigate foreign judicial systems with no help or understanding of procedures, local laws or rights, adding to their distress and confusion. They they received no structured aftercare or follow up support. Despite the psychological impact of such cases, these horrible incidents aren't isolated incidents. They show a broken system that fails British families at their most vulnerable moments. New clause 12 aims to address this, having an appendix in the victim's code, setting out how the code applies to those close relatives of British citizens murdered abroad.

It specifies the appendix must provide specific guidance explaining how families affected by murder report can access support, including clear information about foreign justice processes, which are often complex and distressing to bereaved families in unfamiliar legal systems. This can include dedicated liaison officer translation services and guidance on how to deal with foreign authorities. I've spoken to far too many families, Madam Deputy Speaker, who were pointed towards Google Translate for death certificates and foreign language judicial processes. That is simply not good enough.

In our country. Families would also be entitled under this amendment to emotional and practical support, including specialist bereavement counselling. There are some police services across the country which do this really well, but there are others that do not do it at all. Let me be clear though, what this amendment does not do, it does not seek to interfere with foreign judicial systems, and it really does not place unrealistic expectations on the Fcdo. But what it does is it establishes a baseline, a statutory framework that ensures bereaved families have access to the same quality, support and information here at home, same as any other victim of homicide would receive.

The Murdered Abroad campaign is made up of three families who've turned their grief into a really powerful call for change. They are not acting for any special treatment at all. They are asking for the same structured statutory support that you would receive if tragedy strikes on British soil. The families who suffer these specific horrors should not be forgotten because the crime goes beyond our shores. Because a British life lost is a British life, no matter where in the world it happens.

Compassion in the face of tragedy is not optional. It is a duty. A new clause 12 is a way that we can fulfil that duty today. So I'd like to thank honourable and right hon. Members who have supported my news clause, and I would ask everybody to vote

**** Possible New Speaker ****

for it this evening. Thank you. Natalie Fleet. Thank you, Madam

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Natalie Fleet. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I speak to
18:30
Natalie Fleet Portrait Natalie Fleet MP (Bolsover, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Deputy Speaker. I speak to government. New clause 14. It means. That rapists will no longer. Have.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Have. Access to children conceived by their crime. It puts the right of survivors

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It puts the right of survivors above the rights of criminals. It protects mummies and their precious protects mummies and their precious babies. It's not okay that it took so long for the law to change, to keep up with common sense, but to get this change, the government fought to get us on these benches and into government, bringing our real life experience with us and that of our community, supported by ministers, right up to the Prime Minister determined to tackle violence against women and girls.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. Ten babies are born every day as a result of rape in the UK. For too a result of rape in the UK. For too long, we have told ourselves that rape only happens in far away rape only happens in far away countries. That is a recent crime that arrives on boats. Before that, that arrives on boats. Before that, rapes only happened when a woman dragged down an alley by a stranger, or when a vulnerable girl is or when a vulnerable girl is targeted by a gang.

No rape is targeted by a gang. No rape is happening here and now, just as much as it always has. It's in our communities. It is happening to our communities. It is happening to our women, by our men. If a quarter of women are raped or sexually assaulted most of the time by men assaulted most of the time by men they know, this means that women we know are being raped by men. We know some of these rapes will know some of these rapes will result in pregnancy.

Until we start to believe that and accept that nothing will change, women will continue to live in fear of not being believed, so scared that instead of being able to speak up, they hide their trauma in plain sight. That has to stop now. And we all have a role to play. But it starts with politicians no longer failing women by at best not using their power to protect them, or at worst, seeking to weaponise their trauma.

Regardless of our class, age or background, rape has always been part of our story as women. It is a part the government is hearing, not shying away from not ignoring because it's too difficult. Instead, this government is choosing to use the law to acknowledge that this is happening. Protecting victims without retraumatizing automatically removing parental responsibility where there is a conviction of rape. And also saying that we believe you even without conviction, giving the courts the power to take action where it sees that this is a child, probably conceived from rape.

Laws like this don't change without a fight. This law is changing because we had we have a Prime Minister who took time to sit with me and listen to the voices of victims and vow to do something about it because of people like Baroness Harman, the Minister for Safeguarding and Violence Against Women and Girls, the Home Secretary, the Justice Secretary, the Minister for Courts and Legal Services, members from all across the House listening and helping me navigate this place to find a solution with the Minister for victims leading the change.

So, as the 690th women MPs, statistically, the 172nd to be raped, one of the few to use this chamber to speak out. My message is to victims and survivors everywhere. I know that speaking out is tough, and until you find your voice, I will keep telling your stories. Because sharing our truth is the only way that we will ever see change. Like this and force shame to change sides.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yes. So courage calls to courage

**** Possible New Speaker ****

So courage calls to courage everywhere. If you are one of the women affected by this law change, women affected by this law change, I ask you to tell somebody that you I ask you to tell somebody that you love and trust. I want you to give them the opportunity to readily them the opportunity to readily believe you and embrace their believe you and embrace their chance to support you. I want to end with the words of a brave mummy, who remains anonymous, to keep who remains anonymous, to keep herself and her child safe, she herself and her child safe, she said.

They won't do it. They'll let me down. They won't believe me. They'll see that what happened was They'll see that what happened was my fault, that I asked for it. That it was my behaviour that caused this. That the worst thing this. That the worst thing imaginable happened. And I only have myself to blame. The rape grew have myself to blame. The rape grew inside me until I had to part with it. By giving birth a birth, I have it. By giving birth a birth, I have repeated nightmares about.

It's been so tough raising my child as a been so tough raising my child as a loving mother, even though I struggle with the fact that that child exists. If you change the law today, that will be incredible. It means I can use the law to keep me and my baby safe. It might even mean I can finally report it. I will be thinking of her, her incredible bravery and her wonderful child as I walk through tonight.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I call Paul, Karla. Paul, Curly.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I wish to speak on. My new. Clauses 15. And 16,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

which concern restorative justice. These clauses are supported. By the charities why me? For

**** Possible New Speaker ****

whom I'm an ambassador and call. Mediation. As well as Restorative Justice Council and others who work every

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Council and others who work every day with. Victims and offenders. I thank honourable. Members for my own party and from Labour and Conservative
18:37
Paul Kohler Portrait Mr Paul Kohler MP (Wimbledon, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
from Labour and Conservative benches, have asked me to add their names and support. The need for these clauses could not be clearer. After years of conservative failure. Our justice system stands at breaking point with unacceptable delays. Our courts are clogged, witnesses drift away or begin to forget, and our prisons are stretched beyond breaking point. The Tories have left us with a legacy of neglect, and the people who suffer most are the victims whose voices are too frequently ignored. We must do more for the victim at the heart of the criminal justice process, rather than simply as one of the pieces of evidence to be heard in court.

Victims are more than just witnesses to the crime, but too often that is their only role in the court proceedings. Increasingly, when we talk about justice for victims, the the debate collapses into retributive justice for victims. Want is to lock the door and throw away the key. Even David Gauke, the most liberal Lord Chancellor in my political lifetime, his recent and mostly excellent sentencing review falls into this error, with a chapter on victims focusing on keeping them better informed about their sometimes unrealistic expectations concerning the severity of punishment.

His review, like today's bill, makes no mention of restorative justice, which should be at the heart of giving victims access to justice. Victims of crime do not want retribution, but closure, and giving them the opportunity to enter into a process that allows them to share their feelings concerning the crime with others, often culminating in a meeting with the perpetrator, has repeatedly

**** Possible New Speaker ****

been shown to achieve just that. Will the member give way? I will. Does he accept that? Actually.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Actually. There are some victims of very, very serious crimes who don't want a meeting and resolution in a community, but want to see a very

**** Possible New Speaker ****

community, but want to see a very serious offender spend a long time in prison. Well, of course, restorative justice is not right for every victim. I say to the honourable member, it is right for many victims and including myself, I victims and including myself, I don't know. I don't begin to understand why the honourable member finds that difficult to member finds that difficult to understand. As I know from personal experience, when my wife, eldest daughter and I met one of the daughter and I met one of the attackers who subjected me to a murderous attack in my home and terrorised my family, we suffer.

terrorised my family, we suffer. Justice is not about forgiveness, although that often happens as a by-product. But in giving the victim time and space to move on from the crime. My daughter, who moved out of the family home moved out of the family home following the attack, moved back in back in after the restorative justice meeting. It allowed her to justice meeting. It allowed her to demythologise the perpetrator. No longer a monster, the deeply flawed human being who could know who she could look straight in the eye and cast from her nightmares.

That cast from her nightmares. That meeting transformed our family and her life. Yet forget, for far too many victims, restorative justice remains out of reach. Sadly, only 1 in 20 adult victims with a known offender are routinely told about it. That's why new clause 14 is so crucial, as it will create a statutory right to a meaningful referral to restorative justice services, not a token leaflet or tick box exercise, but a proper referral made as soon as reasonably practicable once the offender is identified and also subsequently at appropriate times during the criminal justice process.

Participation, I would emphasise again, would always remain voluntary, of course, but every victim would have the right to be informed, supported and supported to decide for themselves what is wrong with that? The government may argue they are considering strengthening the victims code, and clause eight does indeed enhance the victim Commissioner's reporting. That is welcome, but not enough. The Commissioner can only report on what exists new. Clause 15 ensures there's something meaningful to measure a statutory right to referral.

Without it, access to justice will remain inconsistent and uncertain. Whilst new clause 15 establishes a meaningful statutory right, new clause 16 ensures a meaningful review process by requiring the Secretary of State to report on the uptake of restorative justice and requiring them to make recommendations to improve access. The government truly values restorative justice. Let them prove it with evidence that parliaments see the data and the plan to expand its use. This report complements the Commissioner's powers whilst review compliance with the code.

Whilst they review compliance with the code. This clause goes further. Reporting on usage barriers and ways to increase participation. Together, they create both the right and the oversight victims deserve. There are no cost implications in these new clauses. This is about coordination, not cash. The infrastructure already exists. What is missing is the statutory backbone to ensure every victim, wherever they live, has equal access to restorative justice. Let us not forget, whilst restorative justice is all about putting victims at the heart of criminal justice process, it has the proven, added advantage of cutting recidivism rates.

The government often speaks about tackling the causes of re-offending, employment, housing, addiction. Restorative justice tackles the psychology of criminality. It changes behaviour by confronting offenders for human consequences of their actions. Not every offender, of course, but a significant number. So I say to the Minister, if you truly stand with victims, want to cut reoffending, do not simply make meet promises to review the code or commission another pilot. Make make access to restorative justice meaningful and real. Support new clauses 1516 if not today in the other place, allow restorative justice to do what punishment alone cannot heal the victim, reform the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

offender and mend the system on which we all depend. Thank you. Anneliese Mitchell.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Anneliese Mitchell. Yes, thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. And before I begin, I'd like to pay tribute to my like to pay tribute to my honourable friend from Bolsover for her bravery and for the remarkable her bravery and for the remarkable work she has done in her short time of being here, including on this of being here, including on this bill with new clause 14. So proud to be on these benches with her. But today I'm going to speak to a measure at the heart of this bill attendance at sentencing hearings.

attendance at sentencing hearings. It will compel convicted criminals to attend those hearings and to attend those hearings and provide the strongest of consequences where they refuse. This law is for Olivia Pratt,
18:43
Anneliese Midgley Portrait Anneliese Midgley MP (Knowsley, Labour)
-
-
This law is for Olivia Pratt, Cobell and other victims. Madam Deputy Speaker, in August 2024, two of the most remarkable women I have ever met walked into my first MP surgery. They are my constituents. Cheryl Cobell and Antonio Alverson, and they are with us in the chamber today. Cheryl's Olivia's mum and Antonia's Cheryl's cousin. On the 22nd of August 2022. Olivia, a little girl just nine years old, was murdered by a stranger in her own home.

The murderer, Thomas Cashman, fired a bullet through the door of Olivia's home, which passed through the wrist of her mum, Cheryl, before hitting Olivia in the chest and ending her life. Cheryl fought with her heart and soul to save her baby. No mother should have to go through such unimaginable pain. And while nothing in this world can bring Olivia back, nothing can hold back a grief so great looking, that person in the eye telling them to their face the cost of their crime, the effect that that has had on the lives of their loved ones can give victims just a small semblance of justice and closure.

But Cheryl never had that chance. Under our current justice system, the ball is in the criminal's court and they can choose to opt out of attending their sentencing. That's exactly what Olivia's murderer did. Cashman chose to remain in his cell, refusing to face the court to hear Cheryl's words or look her in the eye. It was an act of a coward. Yes, but instead of collapsing under this weight, Cheryl fought back. She and her family have campaigned with their all.

So no other family will suffer what they suffered. Madam Deputy Speaker, that is why, at the second reading of this bill, I read out Cheryl's victim impact statement in full. There the words the murderer, the coward Thomas Cashman refused to hear. I wanted the words of Cheryl Korbel committed to this house so that they would be on record in this place forever. I wanted her words to ring out in this chamber for all the world to hear, like they should have done in Cashman's ears that day.

His refusal to turn up shone a spotlight on what is wrong with this system. And I want to thank the government, the victims minister, the former justice secretary and the Prime Minister for listening and acting on Cheryl and Antonio's wishes. It puts victims where they belong, in the driving seat of our justice system. This injustice has gone on for far too long, and that stops now. Yeah, that's down to them. This is a law for Olivia. It is her legacy.

It is Cheryl's legacy. And it is a law and a legacy for the other families who have campaigned. Madam Deputy Speaker, I am delighted that these provisions have united support across this House, and I am confident that it will do so in the other place. Let's back it, pass it and make it law at speed so that no

**** Possible New Speaker ****

victims voice is ever shut out of justice again. Thank you Betty. Thank you, Madam.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam. Deputy Speaker. And. What a privilege. It is to follow. That powerful.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Speech from the member from Knowsley and also the member for Bolsover. Clearly two very formidable parliamentarians. And it's a privilege to be in the same debate as them. I stand today to
18:47
Saqib Bhatti Portrait Saqib Bhatti MP (Meriden and Solihull East, Conservative)
-
-
debate as them. I stand today to speak on behalf of my constituents, Bethan and her two parents, who are in the gallery here today, and I'm going to do that kind of rare thing from this side of the benches and thank the government, thank the government for making the changes on restricting parental responsibility of convicted sexual offenders. It is hugely, hugely important. Clearly the right thing to do. And just by background, my my constituents Bethan who who are covered by the BBC in her story when she learned that her husband ex-husband had been convicted of some of the most serious child sex offences you can think of, he still retained responsibility of having access to her child.

And I'm sure it's not lost on parliamentarians across this House that in those instances, those paedophiles, those sexual offenders, that is the last bit of coercive control and toxic control that they retain. And it was actually in the last Parliament, Baroness Harman and the Minister for violence against Women and Girls, who pushed that amendment. I had the privilege to watch with my constituents from up in the gallery at the time. Sadly, it didn't make it through wash up, so the work wasn't done.

It wasn't completed at the time. Now, in Bethany's case, they had to spend £30,000 of their own money to get it through family courts. Obviously a resource that is not accessible to all, which is why they they went along on this journey to ensure that they could try and make sure that more victims and those parents could have take advantage and mothers could take advantage of of this piece of legislation and be protected even if they didn't have the resource. So really, I speak to be their voice.

I don't intend to take that much of the house's time, but they really wanted me to place on record their gratitude to Baroness Harman. Alex Chalk, the former Secretary of State for justice, who I know has continued to stay in touch with them. And while while there was a bit of work to be done, and I'm pleased that we've got there and the report stage, they also wanted me to place on record their thanks to Laura Farris, the minister, both ministers indeed, who are in their place, and the Justice Secretary, because they really have protected vulnerable mothers and children and spared them from excruciating distress.

So while I do place a record on my gratitude, it would be remiss of me not to ask a couple of questions. But it is from from Bethan and her parents. Because they did. They did query around the restriction to four years. The sexual harm prevention orders. I believe they come in from a two and a half year sentence. So if there's some clarity, the minister might be able to give on that and update it. And the other thing is, well, it talks about the children of sex offenders and the restriction on parental rights.

I don't think it mentions a future prospective children. So. I can see the minister's nodding. Perhaps she can say that on record. In that case, just to give that clarity. But again, I've got the very easy task of being their voice today and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

saying, thank you. It's a really important thing to do. So yeah. Yeah, yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah, yeah. Lauren Edwards yeah. Thank you, welcome. This bill, which delivers long

**** Possible New Speaker ****

This bill, which delivers long overdue reforms to protect victims and which goes a long way to rebuilding confidence in our rebuilding confidence in our judicial system. I particularly thank the members for Bolsover and Knowsley for their really powerful contributions to this debate this
18:51
Lauren Edwards Portrait Lauren Edwards MP (Rochester and Strood, Labour)
-
-
contributions to this debate this evening. May I also thank the honourable member for Maidenhead for proposing new clause 12 on UK citizens that are murdered abroad. The previous conservative government failed to address this issue in the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024, and I thank him for raising this important issue once again. As the honourable member has explained, the lack of any statutory support for the families of British nationals murdered abroad is a glaring gap in our legal system. Families who find themselves in this deeply distressing circumstance must deal not only with their immense grief, but difficult practical issues such as navigating a foreign legal system, often with language barriers and unfamiliar police forces and judiciaries.

New clause 12 tries to address this anomaly by creating an appendix to the victims code, setting out how the code applies to close relatives of British nationals resident in England and Wales who were victims of murder, manslaughter or infanticide committed abroad. He's absolutely right that families in these awful circumstances need more support and are being failed by the current system. At the very minimum, they deserve the same recognition and support under the law as those whose tragedies occur here within the UK.

Currently, they are only able to access discretionary support that they may be given by local chief constables, government departments and national services such as the National Homicide Service and the Victim Contact Scheme. And this is not good enough. We need statutory rights for families in these circumstances to be treated and supported as victims themselves. However, rather than an appendix to the victims code, I think we need a framework that is more bespoke, offering tailored help to families who need to navigate a particularly difficult set of circumstances, such as repatriation of of their loved one, or keeping informed about a police investigation or court process that may be happening on the other side of the world, often in a different language.

Although I wholeheartedly agree with the principle behind New Clause 12, I cannot support it as I think we need to go further with both justice ministers and Foreign Office ministers working together on a specific framework to support the UK families who have lost loved ones while abroad. I'm afraid I also can't support the new clause because by my reading, I consider subsection one is too narrowly drawn. I'm currently supporting the family of a constituent from Strood who has died in suspicious circumstances abroad in India.

I'm afraid they have struggled to get the right support from the Foreign Office, and they came to me in desperation as they did not know where else to go for help. Kent Police have been helping them through their missing persons unit as distressingly, the first they knew that anything had happened to their father was when they were sent a video of his cremation, received at 3 a.m. in the morning UK time. However, there are obvious limits to what the Kent Police can do in this situation, as there is currently not even a murder or manslaughter investigation as it's unclear what happened.

They would not be covered under subsection one of new clause 12 by my reading, despite needing the same support as families in those situations who the honourable member is nobly trying to help. So rather than putting new clause 12 to a vote, I urge the honourable member to join me in welcoming the Minister's comments. In her opening statement about the action that is taking part in this space, and to join me in calling for her to commit today to working with her Foreign Office, equivalent to design a specific framework that will give statutory rights not only to the families of UK residents who are the victim of murder, manslaughter or infanticide, but also those who have died in suspicious circumstances so that everyone who is facing this, this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

difficult set of circumstances, can get the support that they need. Yeah. Andrew George.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Andrew George. congratulate. The Minister for bringing

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The Minister for bringing forward what is a raft of really important changes. It's a pleasure to follow the honourable member for to follow the honourable member for Rochester and Strood. I'm not qualified. I would ask my hon. Friend the member for Maidenhead to Friend the member for Maidenhead to to to address the points raised. But I imagine that the purpose of But I imagine that the purpose of of new clause 12, which I strongly support, if there are if there are technical changes to it, to to make technical changes to it, to to make it even more effective, then clearly that is something which we would all approve of.

And in any
18:55
Andrew George Portrait Andrew George MP (St Ives, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
would all approve of. And in any case, my understanding is that it would be requiring the Secretary of State to bring forward precisely those kind of changes. So it doesn't actually actually stipulate what the what those changes are in detail. I, I with others, very warmly congratulate the honourable member for Bolsover on, on, on a very, very impressive and powerful speech. And I know that the Minister has already congratulated her in advance for that and for the campaign that she has, has run.

And equally, the member for, for a very, very powerful speech indeed. And my hon. Friend, the member for Wimbledon and Maidenhead for making strong, strong cases as well. I start by just repeating the words of my hon. Friend the member for Chichester, in reminding us that the primary purpose is certainly that I've something I've always said the primary purpose of custodial sentences must be public protection. And it's on that issue on which I wish to concentrate really on.

And this is in entirely led, if you like, by or informed by a case I've been pursuing on behalf of my constituent, Tina Nash. And the minister is aware, because I've corresponded with her on on this subject. She was she was horrifically attacked by by her former partner in in in 2011 for a 12 hour period until she managed to escape. But in that time she was battered, had her eyes gouged out, a jaw broken, nose broken, an appalling an appalling beating which she was lucky to survive.

And a survivor. She she is, and her former partner was was given a life sentence. Jail for life with a minimum term of six years in the following year in 20, in 2012. But he was moved to to a category D open conditions earlier this year and my constituent was not consulted about this and only informed after the decision had been had been taken. And bearing in mind that she is is blind, you can understand why she fears that she might go shopping and he might be in her her company without her knowledge.

She is incredibly scared as a result of that decision, and she had no say in in it, nor consulted. And I brought forward new clause 17, urging the government to accept that that that victims have a right to a veto in reasonable circumstances for their own public protection, for their own protection, not in all circumstances, not in every condition, but to certainly make sure that they are properly consulted. There are a number of other failings in the system which, which which I think require.

And I think as a result of this experience, I think requires the government to make sure that this whole process has a belt and braces of support for victims through this, through this process, she, she, she wanted to pursue this matter with the with the parole board. And they were not responding to her until, until until my intervention. And then there was an offer of a meeting that simply isn't good enough. It shouldn't, it shouldn't, you know, you know, be down to a member of Parliament to force that, that, that, that, that kind of thing to happen.

Yes. She was she was given support of the victim contact scheme. And I'll come back to that in a, in a moment. But the she was offered an opportunity to complain. And this was the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman provided my constituent with a complaint form. But it was months later, after she completed this complaint, that she was informed that, in fact, she had completed a complaint. Assume they had assumed that she was the prisoner, not the victim. I mean, can you believe that level of incompetence and the way that she had been treated through that, that that process, wasting her time, stressing her out, being treated appallingly through this process as well? Of course, her complaint was rejected as outside the remit, and a fact which was not communicated initially to her, and it caused her an enormous distress and and confusion.

I mean, she she has to overcome all of these problems on, in circumstances where, where she is blinded, blinded by her perpetrator and still having to somehow navigate these, these, these processes. Of course, the PPO apologised for their error, but but with a lack of empathy for my constituent, I have to say, in the process, and in a facetious response, directing her to to the victims commissioner in relation to her, her interfacing with the Victims Liaison Officer and the Victims Contact scheme.

I mean, I've this week was received further communication from from Tina where she has been attempting to seek support from the service and made inquiries about, as my hon. Friend for for for Wimbledon was referring to earlier the the restorative options that might be available to her, which I thought was incredibly brave of her to even consider it in these in these circumstances. But she was prepared to at least explore what would it mean? How would she go about it? And so on.

And she had a response from her victim contact officer, ultimately, in which she says, and I'll quote from her, her message to me that they he shouted at me that the perpetrator is scared of me. So they are now trying to make me feel like I am the perpetrator, and the perpetrator is the victim, and they have to protect him. I mean, this is the victim contact scheme there to support the victim, not to defend the perpetrator. What's going on? So.

So she says she goes on. So I've removed myself from the victim contact scheme as I don't trust them. I am not being supported. I mean, this simply is not good enough. What is happening to this system to allow that set of circumstances to, to, to arise? So yes, I've got a, an amendment proposed and the amendment might you might think it's an unreasonable request on behalf of victims that they should be entitled to a, to a veto, but something has to be done.

If this is the experience that victim that has gone through all of that is treated in this manner, we really do need to strengthen this system and not allow it to continue as it is. As Tina has been so appallingly, appallingly let down by this system. I mean, she has been told that her perpetrator, her now is and now now is remorseful. Is, is, is contrite about the whole thing. But I do wonder whether they fully understand the, you know, the psychopathy of, of people of that nature that they can they can, they can be as violent as that, and they can also act up and persuade professionals that they're remorseful.

I think it's theatrical, theatrical contrition and insincere repentance. And I do worry that the system, I think, is vulnerable to people like that. So I would urge the minister to look at this and look at this again, and to make sure that our victims are properly that, that, that the victims and survivors are properly, properly supported. Thank you very much.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Matt Bishop. Yeah. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, when I was serving in the police when I was serving in the police force, my work often ended when we put perpetrators behind bars or sometimes when I stood in the court sometimes when I stood in the court to give evidence. But for the victims, their ordeals, sadly,
19:05
Matt Bishop Portrait Matt Bishop MP (Forest of Dean, Labour)
-
-
victims, their ordeals, sadly, doesn't end there. Many reached out to me long after my role was done to tell me that they still felt unheard and protected, and that justice for them was never truly served. And too many survivors live in fear. Which is why I welcome the provisions in this bill. Tracking victims, checking over their shoulders, altering their routines, wondering when the person who hurt them might walk free and attack them again. And that's no way for anybody to live in society.

It's precisely why I welcome the provisions in the bill, such as expanding the Victim Contact Scheme, which will give victims vital reassurances, protecting them from being blindsided by their offenders release, and helping them reclaim a sense of safety. I'm particularly pleased about new Clause 14, which many members have spoken so passionately about today. I'm pleased to see the presumption of parental access suspended for parents who commit crimes against children because one child lost due to a criminal parent being granted unsupervised contact is one child too many.

No one should ever have to risk their child's safety because of a system that puts rights before reasons, and ordering offenders to attend their sentences is another critical step, both in that process and the next process is part of the bill. Victims deserve the chance to look those responsible in the eye, to be heard and to begin healing, and perpetrators must face the full weight and impact of their crimes. No more hiding from the consequences of what they've done. And it's on this point that I must highlight the work of the justice for victims group, an independent organisation of families who I've had the privilege to meet on several occasions who have turned their pain sorry, into purpose.

Sasha Brett was 16 when she was raped and stabbed more than a hundred times by her killer. Tony had lost his lower legs as a result of child cruelty by his own parents. Sarah Everard was abducted whilst walking home by a serving police officer, raped, murdered, and her body was disposed of at just four years old, Violet Grace Jones was killed by a dangerous driver in a stolen car driving 80 miles an hour in a 30 mile an hour zone, who spent beer, and the perpetrators spent barely more time in prison than Violet was alive.

Last but not least, of this group, Joanne Mustafa was killed by a serial sex offender who stored her body in a freezer alongside another murder victim, Henriette. The families of these victims are just a few of many who have been let down by the justice system and its treatment of victims in one way or another all the time. One victim told me that their victim impact statement was so heavily edited by defence lawyers that they barely recognised their own words. How can anyone find closure when their voice is silenced in that way? And it's not right? That's why I'm pleased.

I've spoken to my friend, the Minister several times in depth to talk about this and why I welcome the outcomes that she's brought forward, and it's why I want to see and have campaigned so much to see some real reform of victim impact statements. No family should ever have to water down their grief or pain, just to spare the feelings of the person who caused it, and victims deserve to be heard in their own words, honestly and fully. Offenders must also be made to hear every word, to confront the true devastation that they've caused.

The principle ties ties directly into the provisions of the bill. Yes, offenders should be compelled to attend their sentencing, but they should also be compelled to listen to how their crimes have impacted victims and their families. There should be no place to hide for perpetrators, and no reasons for victims to edit or soften their voices to fit the comfort of those who harm them. Justice for victims is also calling for clarity on terminology. Life sentences don't mean life, so we should stop pretending that they do justice for victims are also right to call for a clarity of life sentence, and it should mean that life is behind bars for life.

Yes, we have whole life sentences, but it doesn't do them any harm or favours. When life sentences are without being a whole life sentence is not equivalent to 12 years, I think. The public deserve honesty and victims deserve truth. Additionally, there must be changes to the time limit set on victims families to be able to appeal offenders sentences. Katie, who Sasha's sister, said that currently victims and families only have 28 days to appeal unduly lenient sentences, normally at a time when a grieving and traumatised.

But criminals are allowed to appeal after this time in exceptional circumstances. But why don't victims and their families get the same rights? And that question cuts to the heart of this debate. Victims and families deserve fairness and they deserve to be heard. These are not radical reforms. They're small, practical, compassionate steps that would make a profound difference to people's lives. So in the interest of time, Madam Deputy Speaker, I wholeheartedly support this bill and the progress it represents.

But I do urge the government to go even further to deliver real justice for victims and survivors, and to ensure that no one who has already

**** Possible New Speaker ****

suffered once is ever failed by this system ever again. Jess. Asato. Yes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yes. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, can I start by thanking the minister for accepting. The principle behind amendment
19:11
Jess Asato Portrait Jess Asato MP (Lowestoft, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

The principle behind amendment nine, which I have now withdrawn, and introducing a new amendment to restrict parental responsibility restrict parental responsibility for serious child sexual abusers who offend against children who are not their own. Building on the government's very welcome step of restricting it for those who do, this represents a real step forward for child safety, and I want to pay tribute to the collaborative spirit of my honourable friend, the member for Pontypridd, as well as the many members across the House who supported the amendment, alongside fair hearing and the many victims who have fought so hard for this change.

I also want to put on record my support for Nkx1 two and 18, and to give my heartfelt love

**** Possible New Speaker ****

for the honourable member for Bolsover and her eloquent bravery. Yeah. With your permission, Madam

**** Possible New Speaker ****

With your permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to speak to knuckles, ten and 11, in my name, though I won't be pushing to vote. These amendments seek to place statutory duties on the place statutory duties on the relevant authorities to commission specialist services for victims of abuse and exploitation and those that care for them. The government has already committed in its Tackling Child Sexual Abuse Progress update earlier this year to increase access to support for victims and survivors of child sexual abuse, and the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, which reported three years ago last week recommended a national week recommended a national guarantee of support for victims of sexual abuse.

NC ten, which is sexual abuse. NC ten, which is supported by Women's Aid, the NSPCC, Barnardo's, Action for children, catch 22, the centre for Expertise catch 22, the centre for Expertise on Child Sexual Abuse Safelives Respect ideas, as well as 49 of my Respect ideas, as well as 49 of my colleagues across parties, seeks to make this a reality by ending the make this a reality by ending the postcode lottery that victims face and ensuring we have adequately

**** Possible New Speaker ****

funded specialist services for whoever might need them. We of. Course, on that point.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Course, on that point. I thank my hon. Friend for giving way, and would she agree with me that community based services supporting victims of services supporting victims of domestic violence and sexual abuse like Next Chapter, Cara and Restitute in Essex do vital work

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Restitute in Essex do vital work that should be backed by multiyear commissioning. Arrangements in the East of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Arrangements in the East of England and beyond. I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention and pay tribute to the intervention and pay tribute to the services in her local area. We will all have many of those specialist services that I'm sure will want to services that I'm sure will want to pay tribute to this evening. The Centre of Expertise on Child Sexual Abuse estimates that there are Abuse estimates that there are 55,000 adults and children in England and Wales on waiting lists England and Wales on waiting lists for support following child sexual abuse, and the Domestic Abuse Commissioner has found that over a Commissioner has found that over a quarter of domestic abuse services are having to turn away children are having to turn away children who are victims of abuse.

It is a stain on this country that fewer than half of domestic abuse victims than half of domestic abuse victims are able to access the community based support that they deserve. I expect that the public would be astonished to know that there is no automatic right to specialist support after a terrible, traumatic crime such as rape or domestic abuse, even though the victims code specifies that you have a right as a victim to be referred to specialist services, this is not an actionable right.

You cannot sue anyone if it is not upheld. And the sad reality is that specialist services are on their knees. 23 child sexual abuse support services have closed in the last 18 months due to financial pressures. Just the week before last, Jewish sexual abuse support was forced to close due to cuts which have had a particular impact on small organisations. Their chief executive, Erica marks, made a stark warning expect to see more community sexual violence organisations fail, she said.

That is not acceptable, not if we want to halve violence against women and girls by and for services like hers, are the backbone of our response to victims of abuse, and they help to reach some of the most excluded in our society, losing the vital and life saving support provided by organisations like Jesus and others will not make victims safer. We know that there are many pressures on the public purse, but there is a financial case to be made for investing in these support services.

A 2021 report for the Home Office estimated that the economic and social cost of contact child sexual abuse alone was £10.1 billion. That is money we lose in economic output and huge costs to the NHS, the police and the criminal justice system. The cost of domestic abuse, which affects 2.4 million adults a year and accounts for 1 in 5 homicides, is estimated by the Domestic Abuse commissioner to cost £85 billion per year. That is £47 billion more than the budget of the Home Office and Ministry of Justice combined.

To do nothing will not save us money. It will only ensure that costs spiral loading pressure on all of our public services and reducing our economic productivity. And we know that without support, victims are less likely to stay the course of a criminal justice process, less likely to recover from the trauma of their experience, less likely to be able to go back into work, and more likely to remain vulnerable to future exploitation and abuse. Specialist services are those which employ dedicated workers who are trained to understand, for example, the dynamics of coercive and controlling behaviour.

They are those which recognise that rape and domestic abuse are largely gendered crimes, and they recognise that children are not just an adjunct to adults. But just like we have paediatricians, children need their own child centred response. And by and for services go further. They are experts in honour based abuse and the weaponisation of immigration status, the needs of disabled or older victims or dynamics and same sex relationships. And, crucially, they are independent from the statutory sector. They champion the victim first and advocate for the support they need without fear or favour.

In the 2021 Domestic Abuse Act, a statutory duty was placed on commissioners to secure accommodation based support, such as refuges for domestic abuse victims. While the rollout in practice has not been perfect, this has at least placed a duty on local authorities to maintain this provision at a local level. No such duty exists for community based support for domestic abuse victims, despite this being where nearly 70% of victims access support. The previous government promised a consultation on a statutory duty for community based provision in a concession at the end of the Domestic Abuse Bill.

It never happened. A casualty of the changing list of justice secretaries who didn't keep their promises. But it falls to this Labour government to resurrect that promise. We must also recognise those who pick up the pieces after the unimaginable happens to their loved ones. Discovering that their partner has abused their child. Grandparents stepping in to care for children after perpetrators of domestic abuse drive their partners to destitution. 1 in 20 adults are closely related to a victim of serious assault, according to analysis from researchers at the Violence and Society Centre.

People related to victims of violence are four times more likely to feel unsafe in their neighbourhood and two times as likely to have depression or an anxiety disorder than people not related to victims of violence, and they themselves face unique challenges stress, guilt, trauma, depression these are all things parents and carers must balance while dealing with the practical, everyday challenges they face navigating the legal system, coordinating with agencies, understanding safeguarding

**** Possible New Speaker ****

procedures and trying to access therapy to those they care for. But my. Honourable way, I'd happily.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Honourable way, I'd happily. Do so. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker. And I'd. Like to thank the honourable. Member for. Lowestoft for her.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Member for. Lowestoft for her. Fantastic speech. I recently. Met with. Kinship carers.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Kinship carers. They are. Often taking on family members. Who have absolutely. Suffered the most trauma.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Suffered the most trauma. And. Abuse, with very little support. They don't. Understand the child's trauma.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Understand the child's trauma. And they don't understand. order. To get the. Best results for these children.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Best results for these children. Does she not think that we need to think about how we. Extend support. To those. Kinship carers so.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Kinship carers so. They can get support? Those children who have been through the worst of times? I thank.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My honourable friend for her intervention. I absolutely agree that kinship carers, parents and partners are different to those of the primary victim and they need support in their own right. When we support in their own right. When we fail these third party victims, we fail the primary victim too. We allow them to disengage from the legal process and we deprive them of the wraparound support they need when they're at their most when they're at their most vulnerable. New course 11 is supported by the organisations Restitute.

We Stand Fast and Iverson Trust, and a version of this amendment was first laid by Baroness Sally Brinton in the other place, in a bill last year. It would place a statutory duty on commissioners to ensure that there are appropriate independent services available for the parent, guardian or person responsible for the care of a victim who is under 18 at the time of the offence, or who is an adult at risk of harm. This is something that once again, should already be happening.

Supposedly a right in the victims code, and it's recommended that support for non abusing parents and carers should be statutory. NC 11 would bring this crucial recommendation to fruition. Families should not have to wait for years. They want action now. As with victim services, there are severe funding shortages that fail to make the ambition set out in the code a reality. Together, NC ten and NC 11 ensure that if any one of us here were to be abused or exploited, or someone we cared for was abused or exploited, that we and they would be supported.

Yes, it is an ambition long supported that now must be met with action. I look forward to working with the Minister and colleagues across the House on saving our specialist services and saving victims and their families, and I will be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

pleased to vote for this bill tonight. Sarah Champion. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, I.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Deputy Speaker, I. Rise to speak. To new clause. One. In my name, which would ensure the implementation of recommendation 18 from the
19:22
Sarah Champion Portrait Sarah Champion MP (Rotherham, Labour)
-
-
recommendation 18 from the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse. IXA. Survivors of child sexual abuse have been let down by a national compensation scheme for years. Too often their applications are delayed or denied, not because of the legitimacy of their abuses in any question, but because of loopholes loopholes set by the very organisation that was established to support them. The Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority, seeker or kicker. The many limitations of this scheme were considered during IXA, which resulted in a clear recommendation to remove the unfair barriers set by seeker.

But in April, ministers rejected this recommendation. My new clause one would overturn that decision and in doing so has commanded the support of 27 members from across this House, as well as the backing of 29 charities and experts. This includes the Mary Collins Foundation and the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers, who have campaigned passionately on this issue. The minister, in her opening says she wants a universal scheme without hierarchy, but unfortunately that isn't the case at the moment.

My amendment would widen the eligibility of the scheme to include those who have been victims of online facilitated child sexual abuse. The recent Casey audit found that 40% of the 100,000 recorded child sexual abuse offences last year took place online. That's around 40,000 children who will struggle to access compensation because their abuse is not considered violent enough to qualify by seeker, as IXA rightly concluded, this rule does not take account of the extent of harm and damage of online abuse, such as the ongoing fear that images of sexual abuse remain available online indefinitely.

By continuing to leave online abuse out of scope, seeker reinforces the risk that online sexual abuse is somehow perceived as less serious or less deserving of redress, and nothing could be further from the truth. New clause one also seeks to increase the time limit for applications so that survivors have seven years from the date the offence was reported to the police, or from the age of 18. If the offence was reported while they were a child. The scheme currently has just a two year time limit, but the average time it takes for a survivor of child abuse to come forward is 24 to 27 years.

There are many reasons for this. We've heard some in the chamber today trauma, fear and shame not to mention the length of time to go through the court process. The minister knows this, which is why she and the other justice ministers rightly abolished the three year time limit for civil claims by survivors of child sexual abuse, in line with the IXA recommendation 15. However, this decision means that now survivors face a strange paradox no time limit for them to take legal action against their abusers, but tight restrictions if they wish to seek compensation for that same abuse.

The government has argued that there is discretion in the scheme to allow applications after the time limit has expired. That is indeed true. However, the proportion of resolved cases accepted after the time limit has fallen each year between 2020 and 2024. In 2020, 87.3% of applications received outside the time limit were resolved. By 2024, this was down to 66.9%. By contrast, the compensation model in Quebec allows seven years for all types of crime except for domestic abuse, child sexual abuse and sexual violence.

They have no time limit at all, and surely this is the model that we should be following. Finally, new clause one prevents survivors of child abuse from being affected by a rule that blocks or reduces compensation for victims with unspent convictions. Appeal has shared with me a case of a woman who was sexually abused by her father. She had suffered with her mental health as a consequence and was hospitalised while in hospital. She threatened to kill herself with the letter opener.

The hospital called the police and she was convicted of possessing a knife. Because of this conviction, she was then refused the compensation by seeker which had been originally offered to her. That's why new clause one would ensure applicants with unspent convictions are not automatically excluded. Where offences are linked to circumstances of their sexual abuse as a child, anti-slavery charities have also been in touch to explain how this particular rule impacts on victims of trafficking, who try to access the compensation scheme.

It's really not unusual for victims of slavery or indeed child or criminal exploitation, to be forced into criminality by their exploiters. These convictions, however, commonly commonly lead to immense difficulty for those victims to then access compensation, something that victims of modern slavery, for example, ought to be entitled to under article 15 of the European Convention of Action Against trafficking. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme is supposed to be a support scheme of last resort.

Sadly, for many survivors, it's not even that in the long term, seeker needs a complete overhaul. In the short term, however, survivors are keen to see a swift implementation of IXA recommendation 18 because in doing so, this House, this government can send a powerful message that their abuse is recognised, that their future is prioritised and that meaningful

**** Possible New Speaker ****

change is underway. Thank you. Josh Fenton. Glynn.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I want to speak. In support of new clauses ten and 11, which.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Would place a duty on authorities to guarantee. Victims of domestic abuse.
19:29
Josh Fenton-Glynn Portrait Josh Fenton-Glynn MP (Calder Valley, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

And sexual violence and child criminal exploitation support, as well as. Their caregivers. I'm proud.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

proud. To support a. Government who. Are committed. To halving violence against women and. Girls.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Girls. And I am proud to be part of a government that just last, last week announced some of. The most significant steps towards.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

towards. Supporting the victims. Of abuse, denying racist rapists, access to denying racist rapists, access to children born of rape, and an end to the presumption of contacts in the family courts. Not just words, but action. And I'm supporting calls for meaningful action today. Victims are not only. Dealing with trauma of what has happened to them. For many, the thought of the course court cases.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Also risks. Retraumatising them. With the backlog in our courts. A backlog left by previous

**** Possible New Speaker ****

A backlog left by previous governments. Victims are waiting months and sometimes years before cases are heard. That way takes a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

cases are heard. That way takes a huge emotional toll. We have to address that and that fear. Of the.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Of the. Progress process. If we're going to meet our target of halving violence against women and girls,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

we have to support. Victims. Throughout that process, I'm urging the government to. Build a urging the government to. Build a system that gives victims the confidence to come forward, knowing that they won't be left to cope that they won't be left to cope alone. Children who experience abuse face unique and lasting harms abuse face unique and lasting harms without the right specialist support. The devastating impact of support. The devastating impact of child trauma can echo through a lifetime and add to add to that, lifetime and add to add to that, caregivers who often also traumatised without further support, they not only don't get the support

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that they need, but they are also not as able to provide the. Love and. Stability that the child that they're helping needs. I'm proud of they're helping needs. I'm proud of this government's work so far to strengthen the victims code, to improve the way that victims of these horrendous crimes are treated, but we can build on that by making sure that wherever someone lives, they can rely on the right specialist services to help them cope with that trauma, to manage the emotional strain of the trial and to rebuild their lives after it.

Together, these measures recognise that victims and their families need wraparound support, not piecemeal provision. In Calder Valley, we're fortunate to have Alison Lowe, our deputy mayor for policing, who puts violence against women and girls at the centre of the work that she does. We have organisations such as Staying Safe and Victim Support West Yorkshire, which provide lifelines to victims of domestic abuse and crime. We've got the Women Centre, Calderdale, who offer holistic support, but too often these services are stretched and reliant on short term grants and support.

Wounded by a decade of austerity and without the statutory footing that guarantees their future. Madam Deputy Speaker, there's a postcode lottery. We must deliver change that places a duty on authorities to commission specialist services everywhere, so that victims and their caregivers can rely on consistent support across the board. Victims of these crimes deserve more than just words and sympathy. They deserve a system that stands with them and provides the support they need. I hope that this government will deliver practical steps that will.

Deliver these changes that we need. Thank

**** Possible New Speaker ****

you. Marie Tidball. Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker. Being a
19:33
Marie Tidball Portrait Dr Marie Tidball MP (Penistone and Stocksbridge, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy Speaker. Being a parent is a privilege, not a right. I rise to speak to government. New clause. 14 on the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

New clause. 14 on the restriction of parental responsibility for. A child conceived. As a result of rape. Appearing on.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Appearing on. The face of this bill because. Of the. Fierce campaigning force of the. Member for Bolsover.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Member for Bolsover. My friend. My hero. Her law change engraved in the government's.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

government's. Bill puts the needs of survivors above the needs of rapists, casting. In law. A.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

A. Shield for women. Who have had a child as a result of rape. And for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

child as a result of rape. And for their babies, those rapists will no longer be able to retraumatize. These mothers, nor to. Demand

**** Possible New Speaker ****

These mothers, nor to. Demand access to or endanger these children. If anyone says politics children. If anyone says politics doesn't make a difference, I say, look at my honourable friend who shared her own experience of being groomed, abused and. Having a child.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

As a result. Her extraordinary strength is that beautiful baby girl. That strength meant.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

strength meant. She did. So alongside becoming a member of this house and within her first of this house and within her first year as a parliamentarian, today changed the law to protect a changed the law to protect a generation of women, girls and children. This is the difference. Politics in the hands of members like my honourable friend for Bolsover, makes. For our communities, our country, protecting women and children from protecting women and children from vile sex offenders.

It's a non-negotiable priority, central to our government's mission to halve violence against women and girls within a decade. This matters. As the honourable member for Bolsover said ten babies per day are said ten babies per day are currently born as a result of rape, yet we still do not know the true yet we still do not know the true scale of physical and sexual abuse at the hands of known, domestically at the hands of known, domestically abusive parents. What we do know is that 60% of cases in the family that 60% of cases in the family courts involved domestic abuse, that in the nine months from April 2024, 40,000 children will have experienced domestic abuse in the Private Law Children Act.

Cases that have been received by Cafcass. My formidable constituents. Claire Throssell MBE lost her two beautiful boys 11 years ago at the hands of her known domestically abusive ex husband while on a five hour court permitted contact visit when he lured them into the attic of their home with the promise of a train set, and set fire around their house, Claire promised her boys that she would ensure their voices were heard by campaigning to repeal the presumption of contact.

This is the legal principle brought about by the 2014 Children's Act to amend the 1989 Children's Act. The principle means that having both parents in a child's life is always prioritised by the courts over the child's safety, including where there's a known history of domestic abuse. There's been 67 deaths at the hands of known domestic abusers since Women Women's Aid started reporting on this issue just 30 years ago. Five previous conservative governments and look at the benches opposite did nothing, despite their government leading the harm panel report in 2020, an expert review on domestic abuse and the family courts, despite that report recommending that the presumption of contact should be urgently reviewed despite women's Aids research finding there's been 19 more child deaths at the hands of known domestic abusers since Jack and Paul died, no response was published.

For four years under those conservative governments. And where are they today? I first met Claire at a remembrance event at my old school, the same school that her eldest son, Jack went to. I knew of the tragic deaths of her sons, but hearing from her what happened was heartbreaking. I promised her that if I was elected as her Member of Parliament, I would help fulfil her promise to her boys. Last week I took Claire to number ten Downing Street to meet the Prime Minister, the sixth Prime Minister since her beautiful boys died.

But the first prime minister to promise Claire that he will deliver Jack and Paul's law, announcing our government would repeal the presumption of contact in this chamber last week. He did so on the 11th anniversary of the boys deaths. The Prime Minister's promise made clear that the repeal of the presumption of contact will form part of a broader package of family court reforms aimed at better protecting children involved in private law proceedings. Truly decisive action by our government to change the law to protect generations of children where the conservatives failed to do so.

These reforms will ensure that decisions about child arrangements put the child at the centre of decision making, and are based on a robust assessment of potential risks, particularly when domestic abuse is present. Our message is clear the safety of children is paramount. We will stop at nothing to make sure they are protected in our courts. Prioritising children's safety, well-being and their right to grow up free from harm. These changes will reinforce NC 14 and the exceptional work set out in the bill before us today.

By putting children at the centre of the family courts. I am proud that our Labour Government is packed full of brilliant women who stood behind Claire, Throssell, Natalie and I to ensure our government fulfil her promise to her boys, including the Minister of State for Courts and Legal Services, the parliamentary Under-Secretary of state for victims, the Minister for Safeguarding and Violence Against Women and Girls and the honourable members for Lowestoft, Milton Keynes Central and Bolton North East. I'd also like to thank the member for Calder Valley for his work and allyship.

Repealing the presumption of contact is urgent. Can the Minister confirm it will be repealed as soon as the parliamentary time allows? Fulfilling the promise the Prime Minister made to Claire Throssell last week, expediting the repeal of this in the statute book will ensure no more towns like mine will grieve and ensure that Jack and Paul's law is at the heart of our family justice system, where it

**** Possible New Speaker ****

belongs. I commend this bill to the House. Can I just remind members, and I'm very conscious that the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm very conscious that the honourable member for Bolsover made a very impassioned. And. Moving speech, but we must refer

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to her as the honourable member for Bolsover, Adam Thompson. Thank you. Very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. I'm speaking today in favour of new clauses 13 and 14 and the expansion to clause three, having served with colleagues on the bill committee colleagues on the bill committee for this piece of legislation. But can I begin, Madam Deputy Speaker, by thanking all members who have by thanking all members who have contributed tonight? I think there have been a series of very impassioned speeches from across the House, and particularly my the House, and particularly my honourable friends for Bolsover, Knowsley and Penistone and Stocksbridge for their incredibly powerful contributions.

These amendments that we're discussing this evening, Madam Deputy Speaker, are a significant step forward in
19:41
Adam Thompson Portrait Adam Thompson MP (Erewash, Labour)
-
-
are a significant step forward in protecting victims of serious violence and they will help thousands of people. They will help to ensure the safety of victims of serious sexual abuse, victims of crime who have signed a non-disclosure agreement. And, crucially, these amendments will also protect children. News, new clause 14 will ensure the protection of children who have been born of rape. In the second. In the debate on the second reading of this bill, I spoke of a constituent of mine who had had a child that resulted from an abusive relationship.

She told me when I spoke to her of the extreme difficulties that she'd been facing, as she had passed through a long and complex custody battle over her child. She asked me if we as politicians, could look again at parental rights in the context of abusive relationships. Well, I'm very pleased that new clause 14 will protect children born in such circumstances. No longer will children born of rape or their mothers be forced to have a relationship with a rapist. As it currently stands, mothers in some cases must co-parent with a rapist.

Women should not be forced to include their rapist in decisions on their child's healthcare, schooling, or any other aspects of the child's life. Children should not have to be raised by rapists. Mothers who have a child born of rape should be safe in the knowledge that having a child will not tie them to their rapist. Automatic restriction of parental responsibility will ensure that mothers and children are safer. Rapists should not have the automatic right to interfere with their victims lives. This clause frees families from the stress and pain of applying to court.

By ensuring that this restriction is immediate, the expansion to clause three similarly ensures that any person convicted of serious sex offences against any child has their parental rights removed. The safety of children is of the utmost priority, and expanding this measure from those who have abused their own child, to those who have seriously abused any child, is a measure which will ensure the safety of the children that the perpetrator is closest to. Paedophiles should have no right to look after any child here.

I am also pleased to see that new clause 13 will allow us to clamp down on the misuse of non-disclosure agreements, which are used to hide instances where a crime has occurred. Victims of crime should not have to worry about who they speak to regarding the crime of which they are a victim, and non-disclosure agreements should not be used to silence victims of crimes, nor should they stop witnesses coming forward. This amendment means that victims and witnesses of crime can speak to their friends, their family, their support system, but they can also speak to their employers and if they need to, to journalists.

I very much welcome the closing of this loophole, which allows criminals to scare victims into not sharing their experiences. The law must not protect those who seek to silence victims. Madam Deputy Speaker, these amendments will allow us to take significant steps towards the government's aim of halving violence towards women and girls. But more than that, these amendments serve to give victims of serious violent crime justice.
19:44
Kieran Mullan Portrait Dr Kieran Mullan MP (Bexhill and Battle, Conservative)
-
-
Doctor Kieran Mullan. amendments in my name, and the member for Newark and other members of the His Majesty's Opposition. I know the Minister will join me in beginning by thanking all the witnesses who came and gave evidence to us during the committee stage of the House on behalf of victims, including Dame Nicole Jacobs, the Domestic Abuse Commissioner. Baroness Newlove, the Victims Commissioner Katie Kempen from victim support, Rebecca Bryant from resolve, Susie Baker from Suki Baker from the Suzy Lamplugh Trust, Andrea Simon from End Violence Against Women coalition.

Farhana from Women's Aid Glenn and Paula Hugill from justice for victims, and Mark Brooks OBE from the Mankind Initiative. We all benefited greatly from their evidence and the perspective they gave from the view of victims, and it was clear that many of the witnesses and members from both sides of the House were of one view about many of the positive aspects of this bill. For example, the improved powers for the victims commissioner are welcome, and they'll give new strength to their arm in raising issues and securing change on behalf of victims.

The streamlining and expansion of the Victim Contact Scheme will help victims be better informed about key information about their offender. Post-Conviction. Other important measures were considered at committee and I'm pleased to say, whilst at the time the government were committed to their approach, that they have since shifted to some degree, firstly in relation to, and I'll go on to cover some of those and taking some measures in turn, I'd like to begin by talking about the new clause 14, the government's new clause 14, in relation to parental responsibility for a child conceived of rape.

We welcome that the government has now tabled a new clause 14, which creates a duty on the court to make a prohibited steps order restricting the parental responsibility of a person convicted of rape. Where a child has been conceived as a result of that offence. This is an important measure that strengthens the protection available to victims and ensures that offenders cannot continue to wield control over their victims through their children. Can I join members on both sides in paying tribute to the member for Bolsover, who spoke very powerfully in relation to this and has been a committed campaigner, and there are many other members that have been mentioned who've supported her in securing that change.

For too long, victims of rape have faced unthinkable prospect of having to engage with their attacker over matters concerning their child's well-being. Next, can I move on to the change in position from the government in relation to their amendment ten to clause three in relation to parental responsibility? It was quite clear from the committee stage, from the witnesses there and and others that the measure initially proposed by the government was going to fall far short of what was required. So we welcome amendment ten to clause three, which widens the duty on the Crown Court to make an order restricting parental responsibility in cases where a person is sentenced for four years or more for serious sexual offence against a child in relation to all children, rather than just in relation to the child of of their own.

Can I pay tribute again? A number of members have worked towards this particular amendment, but the member for Meriden and Solihull East and the previous Justice secretary, and I don't expect they're still in the gallery. Maybe they are, but the gallery of my constituents, of the Meriden constituents who raised this case in such a high profile way, the minister will know there's been different clauses. A clause first put forward by the conservatives in government, the initial clause from the government, this further clause from the government.

The Minister will know that our our further clause was to remove that requirement for, for, for four years and have it applied more widely to any sexual offence. And the member for Meriden and Solihull East put forward yet another way we might better prescribe who are subjected to these measures beyond just those convicted of those offences with four years or more. But I appreciate this is a new and novel measure and we welcome it. But the measure proves effective in practice.

It we would certainly welcome the opportunity to revisit it in future and see how we might better frame it to protect children. Moving on to amendments four, five, six and seven. In relation to the unduly lenient sentence scheme, the current scheme allows certain sentences to be referred to the Attorney General's Office, if they're thought to be too lenient. It's an important safeguard in our justice system, one that I've made use of. Other members have made use of and and members of the public have done as well.

But too many victims and families simply do not know the scheme exists. And even when they do, the time limits are far too tight for it to work in practice. At the moment, people only have 28 days from the date of sentence to ask for review. That is, four short weeks at what is often one of the most traumatic and confusing times in their lives. For families who've just been through a difficult and emotional trial, 28 days is no time at all. To understand the process, get advice and decide whether to ask for a review.

I. Amendments would make a number of reasonable and practical changes to help fix that. They would extend the deadline from 28 to 56 days, giving the wider public the same time limit the government is giving itself in this bill. So the government is extending the length of appeal for itself, but just not for victims. And we would also allow up to one year for the next of kin or a victim themselves, to imply in cases where they are affected or they've lost, lost a loved one.

It would also place a duty on the CPS to write to victims or their families after sentencing to tell them about the scheme and how it works. Far too often families never hear about the scheme or they hear about it after the deadline has passed. Just in the recent weeks, I met with Karen Garland from the Mary Collins Foundation, who has been supporting a lady called Lauren who lodged an application in time to the government for for the scheme only to be barred from making use of it because the CPS made a mistake in the timing of whether or not.

Well, the time that they had to further appeal it. So on a pure technical basis, she was prevented from lodging a valid appeal, and there is absolutely no way for her to get that looked at. There was an attempt to ask the sentencing judge to look at it again with respect to that sentencing judge asking the same judge who passed the sentence to look at that sentence. Again, it's really not what the US is intended to to achieve. And campaigners have done incredible work to highlight this issue.

People like Katy Brett, who others have mentioned, who launched a petition in memory of her sister Sasha. I won't repeat the awful circumstances of her sister's death as a member. Powerfully highlighted. And I she's saying from who? Also, both of these are from justice for victims who campaigns on behalf of her cousin John Mustafa. I also recently met with Tracy Hanson, who founded the Josh Hanson Trust after the murder of her son. And they've all shown real courage and determination and calling for change.

And they've spoken for so many families who feel let down by the system. The government has said that they will wait for the outcome of a wider review of criminal appeals before taking action, but I want members to be clear. The provisional view of that review in relation to the US was that it shouldn't be changed, and it's absolutely fine as it is. And that review, we have no timetable for when it will be published. We have no timetable for when the government will respond to it.

We've got a bill right here, right now in front of us that would allow us to make changes, and it's the time to take it. The minister talked about certainty in sentencing, but of course victims have to sit and wait, knowing that the criminal can appeal at any time in exceptional circumstances, years later, the criminal can appeal. So there is uncertainty in the existing system. What we want to do is even it out for the public, and we should not forget that behind every case is a family who's been through unimaginable pain, and it's just a measured, proportionate set of proposals that I think the Minister must be sympathetic to, that we should we should vote through tonight on victim impact, victim impact statements.

New clause four. These concern the statements made by victims and sometimes their family members in court. And these statements allow victims and their families to explain in their own words, how a crime has affected their lives. They're an important part of the justice process, and one of the few chances victims have to be heard directly by the court. However, there are real concerns about the restrictions placed on victims are allowed to say in these statements. Many victims and family have said they were told to remove parts of their statements or to avoid expressing their true feelings.

That's deeply unfair and undermines the purpose of the of the statement. I understand the formality of the proceedings, but the current approach often strips away the honesty and the points that victims would like to make. And we've heard about families that have been through this. As others have mentioned, Sarah Everard's parents, Susan and Jeremy, talked about their difficulties. Whilst they absolutely understand the advice they were given and thought that they were very well supported in the court and by the court process, they think the system didn't allow them to say what they would like, and Glenn and Becky Ewins, who I've spoken to frequently, wanting to talk about the the death of their daughter Violet Grace, at the hands of these appalling criminals again, were restricted.

There will be things that the judge can't take into consideration, but surely the approach we need to take is to allow the judge to make clear what points of law will or won't be considered, and what things the victims may wish to say to have their hearing to get their say. But the judge won't technically take into account in relation to sentencing without putting it back on victims and saying that we can't change the system because of the law. So, for example, if the victim wants to say what sentence the victim, the perpetrator should get, what is wrong with that? There's no there's perfectly reasonable thing that any person in court, in this sort of circumstances would want to be able to say, but really saying

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that the judge can't hear that, but sure. I'm grateful. For the opposition spokesperson

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For the opposition spokesperson for giving way. He's right, he's right. There are certain things that that victims should be able to that that victims should be able to say in the victim impact statement. We both agree on this. However, there are clear things that are not there are clear things that are not in the remit of what should be openly discussed in a sentencing hearing. Information pertaining to hearing. Information pertaining to the offender's family, for example, where victims may want to reference that in their victim impact that in their victim impact statements for the safety of those other family members, they should not be mentioned.

So it is right that we have strict guidance, and I that we have strict guidance, and I am willing to work with him and other honourable members in here to ensure that the victims do have a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

voice in this. Yes. And we've been clear that it isn't carte blanche that you can't literally go and say whatever can't literally go and say whatever it is that you like. But within that, our legislation, our proposal allows the government to set, set more clearly in law what those more clearly in law what those things will or won't be, and then puts the onus back on the judge to to disregard things that won't be of relevance to the sentencing. I think that's a perfectly reasonable way to organise things.

Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful for his time and I think he's just he's just outlined exactly what would be wrong in terms of putting this in statute terms of putting this in statute where it isn't black and white. There is a lot of grey area in this, which is why having a specific list of what can and can't be put in place isn't the right approach. We don't need legislation for this. What we need is proper guidance, proper support, proper training to support victims and families so they can have their say in a sentencing hearing.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Legislation with non-exhaustive list parts of it that are in legislation and parts of it that aren't, I'm sure we can agree the aren't, I'm sure we can agree the things that are absolutely vital for people to be able to say, and then other things could be then other things could be determined through guidance. I just think legislation is going to be needed because these are actually as as the minister pointed out, there are fundamental things about there are fundamental things about the legislation for what victim personal statements are that we think are wrong and will need to be changed in legislation to give people that freedom to comment on those issues, and then we can further decide how the judge might further decide how the judge might handle that.

I'd next I'd like to move on. New clause for tabled by my hon. Friend. My friend, I think my hon. Friend. My friend, I think I have to say we're not in the same party. The member for Maidenhead, and I want to commend him for his and I want to commend him for his work on this issue. I've also been able to meet with Eve Henderson from the charity Murdered Abroad, who has long campaigned for better recognition and support for the families of British nationals who've lost ones to murder, manslaughter and infanticide manslaughter and infanticide overseas.

Far too often, these families find themselves in a position of deep grief while also having to navigate complex and unfamiliar foreign legal systems with little or no support from home. They can be left without clear information, without a voice in information, without a voice in proceedings, and without access to the services that victims of crime in this country are entitled to expect. The new clause six seeks to correct that injustice by ensuring the victims code explicitly sets out how it applies in these circumstances, guaranteeing access to practical and emotional support, clear information about processes, and the ability to challenge decisions that affect them.

I thought the contribution for the member from Rochester and Strood was an unusual one. The consistent message against this measure in government of both sides has been that the original proposals were too broad, and then the member thinks very carefully about that brings forward some proposals that are narrow, and the member seems to disagree with that. I'll assume that that's her sincere reason for objecting to it, and nothing to do with the fact that the whips have told them that they can't vote for it.

To conclude, Madam Deputy Speaker, there are a range of measures that we support. We welcome their progress in this House, even when they are imperfect. But the measures on the unduly lenient sentence scheme and victim impact statements are the right measures at the right time. I do trust the Minister's sincerity that she wants to work on these. What I don't trust is the government that she supports and its ability to deliver on what it says it's going to do. MPs have been asked by their constituents to back these measures, and I hope that they do.

There's no reason not to. I would ask all MPs

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to support these measures in the voting lobbies tonight. Here, here. Minister Alex Davies-jones. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

leader of the House. Madam Deputy Speaker, I rise to close what has been an excellent debate on the victims and Courts Bill. I said in my opening statement that this House is at its best when we come together and we rise above party politics to put the interests of our constituents first. And that is exactly what we first. And that is exactly what we have done this evening. Can I thank honourable and right honourable members from across the House for which they have engaged in this debate, and for their collaborative nature, as has been the passage nature, as has been the passage throughout this bill.

This is about people. Madam Deputy Speaker, as I said in my opening, this is about victims and survivors, and this bill has been created and drafted with them. At its heart, it is about putting them back at the forefront of all of us and back in the forefront of the justice system where they belong, because without where they belong, because without them we would have no justice system. Coming to the debate at hand and talking to some of the
19:58
Alex Davies-Jones Portrait Alex Davies-Jones MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Pontypridd, Labour)
-
-
hand and talking to some of the specific issues that have been raised and the amendments that have been tabled. I come to the opposition front bench first. Can I also join him in thanking all of the witnesses that gave evidence session to us in bill committee? They really did help shape this bill, and it is because of their contribution and the strength of feeling from victims directly, as well as honourable and right honourable members in this place and the other place that we have gone further in extending the measures in this bill.

Because when I hear the strength of feeling in this House, and when this government hears the strength of feeling, we will not be afraid to act. Which is why I have committed at this despatch box to going further again on looking at the unduly lenient sentencing scheme, on looking at victim impact statements. And it is right that the Law Commission is currently looking at the unduly lenient sentencing scheme. However, as I said in my opening remarks, I will be monitoring this closely as the bill progresses in the other place and we are looking to see how we can best support victims so that they have representation when they feel that justice has not been fully served.

The opposition front bench and other and the honourable member for supporting the Betham family, the Meriden and Solihull I had the pleasure of meeting with his constituents, raised the four year time limit. This is a novel measure and I'm grateful to the opposition frontbench for their support in this and in recognising that this is just the beginning and we will not fail to go further, following how this has been implemented and the potential consequences for the family, courts, etc. This is just the start and if this does work, then the government future hypothetical children.

But it will cover any children that exist at the point of sentencing for which that perpetrator has

**** Possible New Speaker ****

happily. Give. The Minister. For giving way. I really welcome.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For giving way. I really welcome. This government move. To restrict the access of abusers to their children, to protect them. All too often, protect them. All too often, however, victims that are members of tightly knit small religious groups are pressured to interact

**** Possible New Speaker ****

with their abuser when they get out of prison. Some religious leaders and organisations I'm aware of. Commonly tell victims. That God has forgiven their

**** Possible New Speaker ****

That God has forgiven their abusers, and therefore they. Need to. As well. And in some cases, I've seen those. Victims be ostracised or shunned. If they refuse to engage, so does the Minister agree that the government needs to think about how we can seek to resolve

**** Possible New Speaker ****

about how we can seek to resolve that cultural problem? It's more religious groups. Minister. I thank my hon. Friend for that very thoughtful intervention. He's very thoughtful intervention. He's right. We need to get this right for all victims of all crimes. That includes intersectionality and includes intersectionality and vulnerable victims. This actually speaks to the heart of the amendments tabled in the name of my hon. Friend the member for hon. Friend the member for Lowestoft in terms of, by and for services Specialist Support services, she mentioned Jewish support charities.

I am meeting Jewish Women's Aid tomorrow to talk about how we can better support them. And she's right. This has to be holistic, comprehensive because be holistic, comprehensive because one size does not fit all, fit all when it comes to victims of these

**** Possible New Speaker ****

when it comes to victims of these crimes. I will happily give way. To say just place. On record. Once again, my gratitude. For the time the minister gave

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to meet with Bethan and. Her parents. On this serious issue and the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

change that came about. You know, it really does restore many people's faith in what we do. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. I thank him again for his time and for his support in providing that help to Bethan and her parents. that help to Bethan and her parents. Meeting them was a privilege and hearing their story was a privilege. And it is in their name that we And it is in their name that we have gone further today in this bill, and it is for them and all victims and survivors that we stand here to do more. It's the difference that being in government makes that you can actually do these changes.

As other members have already said this evening, coming now to some of the other amendments that have been tabled, the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, I welcome her to her place. This is I welcome her to her place. This is the first time in the chamber we've had the opportunity to discuss issues of justice. I had a fantastic collaborative relationship with her predecessor, and I look forward to continuing that with her and continuing to work on these issues with her. She mentioned specifically the resource available for the helpline that will be created in order to allow will be created in order to allow victims that direct route to provide information about their perpetrator, about their case, perpetrator, about their case, which is essential.

We too are conscious of resources. We will continue to monitor and refine continue to monitor and refine resource required for this helpline and where possible, we. If there is demand, then we will of course act. But we feel, as has been in the impact statement, that currently the resource there is needed, but we will keep that under review and would not hesitate to act in the fiscal environment given she also mentioned new clause seven about extending eligibility for the victim contact scheme, she will know we have extended that eligibility within this bill.

Again, we will keep that under review if there is if there is a need to expand that further, looking at how we can best support victims, I will mention to the honourable members for Saint Ives as well, because he mentioned this around victim contact scheme and Victims Code. The right to know. We will be launching a consultation later this year on the victim on the victim rights of victims codes, looking at exactly what should be in there, how best we can support victims, and I would encourage all victims and survivors and members to feed into that.

He knows the door remains open for me to meet his constituent, Tina Nash, to discuss her issues firsthand about how I can better support her and other vulnerable victims who are disabled

**** Possible New Speaker ****

as well. Throughout the process, I will give way. I'm very grateful to the Minister. I discussed this with her Minister. I discussed this with her and and she knows because we've corresponded about it as well. I know the my constituent would be know the my constituent would be enormously grateful to to have an opportunity to meet her, and I'm very grateful to her for her response. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

response. Thank you. And I am I am looking forward to meeting him and his constituent in due course to discuss the failings due course to discuss the failings in the criminal justice system that led to her experience. No, no victim should go through what she has and I stand ready to support her and improve the situation. Turning now to the amendment by the honourable member for Maidenhead, honourable member for Maidenhead, which I touched on in my opening remarks, which I know my friend the honourable member for Rochester and Strood, spoke to as the opposition Strood, spoke to as the opposition front bench and others in this chamber, and I know many constituents will have had horrifying casework where families horrifying casework where families are stuck trying to differentiate between a language barrier, a different jurisdiction, a different legal system, all while trying to legal system, all while trying to get answers on what has happened to their loved one.

That is unacceptable. I remain of the view that the victims code is not the right place for these victims to right place for these victims to have that framework, because the victims code is based on the justice system in England and Wales, justice system in England and Wales, it does not apply. It is not right. However, I am committed and I have already met with the Minister in the Fcdo. The Honourable Member for Lincoln to discuss working together with the Fcdo and the Moj about how best we can support victims working with the Victims Commissioner and the charity Murdered Abroad, about creating that dedicated framework, that dedicated guidance as to what victims in this country can expect.

I will.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Be giving away on this in the crucial part of her speech. Can I implore. Her on the work that she's doing

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Her on the work that she's doing to remember the sister of my constituent, Rita Roberts, who was brutally murdered in 1992 and not formally identified until 2023, formally identified until 2023, Rita has still not had justice, and her family are desperate to for any

**** Possible New Speaker ****

support you can give as she was murdered abroad. Minister. I thank my honourable friend for raising this case. It is a horrific raising this case. It is a horrific case and one I know all too well because the previous member for because the previous member for Cardiff, who is now in the other place, has raised this previously and has sought to support Rita and her family. And I will of course seek to support them in any way I can. And working with the Fcdo because justice delayed is justice denied for anyone, regardless of where they are.

But I want to make that commitment to him that we will find the right way forward to find the right way forward to support these families. But I don't believe his amendment is the right one, so I do implore him to one, so I do implore him to withdraw his amendment this evening. Turning now to my hon. Friend, the member for Bristol East. She's right. These are invisible children, right. These are invisible children, and we must do more to protect them. This isn't just about identifying them and their their parents who are the perpetrator.

This is about are the perpetrator. This is about supporting those children and better identifying them. I want to make that commitment to her. She asks me directly, how are we going to do this? The Minister for sentencing and the children's minister have met to discuss this. They held a round table with organisations to look at the best way of doing this, and I will implore on them who desire for them to move quickly on this and involve her in how best to bring this forward.

I wanted to discuss the honourable member for Wimbledon and his amendments on restorative justice. I would encourage all members of this place to go and see punch the play, which is outstanding and probably the best example of restorative justice. Anyone can see the the it will not work for everyone. Not every victim is restorative. Justice is right. It needs consent from both the victim and the perpetrator. And it will not be right for every crime. But in certain crimes it is appropriate and it can provide better victim outcome and better lower re-offending rates in the future.

The prisons Minister is a passionate believer in this, as is the new Secretary of State. We are looking closely at this as a department, and we will continue to work with him to see how best we can bring out restorative justice programs across the Ministry of Justice. I now want to come to the honourable member for forest of Dean. I think we have discussed his commitment already to these victims for families, for justice. I pay tribute to him again. I am committed to working further on on the unduly lenient sentencing scheme to ensure that victims have that right to redress, that right to complain in an appropriate time, and that the victim impact statements are fit for purpose, and they do represent that victims rights for Katie Brett, for the family, for all of those who have felt that they have been silenced, I make that commitment today.

We also need that clarity in sentencing, that transparency of what a sentence actually is. I wholeheartedly agree with him. My honourable friend, the member for Lowestoft and Calder Valley talked about the need for vital support services there. Right. Because without this vital support services that support victims and survivors, we we don't have victims and survivors engaged in a criminal justice system, and there needs to be a multi-year settlement. I think my friend, my honourable friend mentioned that as well in terms of that multi-year settlement, to ensure that they are sustainable, they are effective and they are there to support victims.

They will know we are currently going through the financial allocations process, the Ministry of Justice, we are due to complete this very soon because I know that these organisations, these vital organisations, need that certainty as to the sustainability of their future. And I have made that commitment to them that I will provide that soon. I also hear their calls for more support for child victims. Again, this is something I will be looking at as part of the victims Code consultation later this year, because although we have identified that children can be victims in their own right, there is little to support them and they deserve support too.

And I am committed to working with her and other other honourable members to get this right. Finally coming to my honourable friend the member for Rotherham. Her and I have had this conversation many times about the efficiency, effectiveness of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme. Change cannot be piecemeal here. We need proper change if victims are to be supported, if they are to have redress and if they are to have the recognition that they so vitally need that something has happened to them, and it is recognised that that they are a victim, there is discretion in the scheme.

She mentioned that there are many reasons as to why there is discretion in the scheme. But she's right, I am. The scheme does not work. We have heard that time and time again and again. I am committed to working with her as to what scheme should be in place for supporting victims and survivors. I want to hear from them directly and I'm also keen to hear from Quebec, as she mentioned, as to how the scheme operates there. If we can learn internationally about what is best practice, we should do that.

But most importantly, we need an effective and sustainable redress scheme for victims of violent crime. Finally, I want to pay tribute, as others have to the honourable member again for Penistone and Stockbridge, for Bolsover, for Lowestoft, for every single member in this place who has stood up and discussed the need for change in this bill. They have spoken from their hearts. They have spoken with bravery, from lived experience, about what is needed to support victims and survivors. Don't ever let anyone tell you that this is a difference a Labour government makes.

What is the difference it is delivering for victims. It's not just words deeds not words. That is what we are doing in this chamber this evening. We are making that difference. We are delivering for Claire Throssell. We are delivering for Joanne, Mustafa for Sabina, Nessa, for Olivia Pratt-korbel and the countless others of victims who have been failed by the criminal justice system. That is the difference a Labour government makes and I commend this bill to the House.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that government

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that government new clause 13 be read a second time. As many as are of that opinion say As many as are of that opinion say I. I of the contrary. No, I think I. I of the contrary. No, I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. The question is that government new clause 13 be added to the bill. As clause 13 be added to the bill. As many as of that opinion say I I of the contrary.

No, I think the ayes the contrary. No, I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. We come

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to government new clause 14 I call formally. More formally.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

More formally. Parental responsibility for child conceived as a result of rape.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

child conceived as a result of rape. The question is that new clause 14 be read a second time, as many 14 be read a second time, as many areas of that opinion say I. I of the contrary. No, I think the ayes the contrary. No, I think the ayes have it, the ayes have it. The question is that new clause 14 be added to the bill. As many as of that opinion say I. I of the contrary. No, I think the ayes have it.

The ayes have it. New clause four has been selected for separate decision. I call Kieran Mullan to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

move new clause four formally. Thank you. Move the victim. Personal statements.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

statements. The question is that new clause four be read a second time. As many four be read a second time. As many as of that opinion say I. I of the as of that opinion say I. I of the contrary. No, no. Vision. Clear the
20:13
This debate has concluded
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page