Debates between Baroness Browning and Lord Wigley during the 2010-2015 Parliament

Disabled People: Disability Hate Crime

Debate between Baroness Browning and Lord Wigley
Monday 27th June 2011

(13 years, 4 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Browning Portrait Baroness Browning
- Hansard - -

The noble Lord will know that I am a vice-president of the National Autistic Society and I am very happy to take forward his request.

Lord Wigley Portrait Lord Wigley
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords—

Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill

Debate between Baroness Browning and Lord Wigley
Tuesday 24th May 2011

(13 years, 6 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Wigley Portrait Lord Wigley
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I apologise to the House that I missed the earlier part of this debate, although I have heard all of the Minister’s comments. She mentioned the role of local government and that there might be an involvement in the activities that she has just outlined. Can she confirm that each local government area would have a voice in this, as they do at present on the police authorities—a unique situation in Wales, where every authority is represented?

Baroness Browning Portrait Baroness Browning
- Hansard - -

I have to say to the noble Lord that these negotiations and discussions are still ongoing. However, I hear what he has said and will certainly feed back what he has suggested today.

We have also amended the Bill to ensure that the provisions on community safety partnerships do not touch on matters in respect of which Welsh Assembly Government Ministers have functions. I hope that this account explains how we have reached the provisions set out in the Bill at present. Policing remains reserved. It is this Government’s intention to secure the same reform for the people of Wales as for those in England, following the decision taken in the first session of this Committee. The Bill now removes the current arrangements for policing governance, but I can assure your Lordships’ House that there are ongoing discussions to make sure that we get this absolutely right. I am grateful for the patience of your Lordships’ House. There are amendments that relate specifically to Wales not only in the current group but in subsequent groups.

I turn now to pilots. The amendments tabled by my noble friends would require the Government to pilot police commissions—or police and crime commissioners, as remains the Government’s intent—in certain police areas before establishing them across England and Wales. In the spirit of constructive debate, I will deal with this group as though the amendments affected the original policy and clauses that would have established police and crime commissioners in England and Wales. Your Lordships will know that we are in difficult territory here. We are dealing with two very different bodies in the context of piloting.

I shall not repeat what I have said in debates on previous amendments but I spelt out some of the research that has been done, which clearly demonstrates the public’s appetite for more engagement with policing in their local areas. The success of the crime mapping website launched this year is evidence of this, with 410 million hits since January. Cabinet Office research showed that more than two-thirds of the public wanted an elected person to hold the police to account. I heard what my noble friend Lady Hamwee said about not praying in aid the experience of the Mayor of London. However, I cannot ignore what has happened in London. They mayor is there and the policing structure in London is there, and has been there for a while. While it was not exactly floated as a specific pilot, none the less we cannot ignore the fact that since the Mayor of London took on responsibility for policing, MPA correspondence has more than quadrupled. For these reasons there is no need to conduct pilots to establish these matters. Pilots also present practical problems.