Domestic Abuse Survivors: Government Support

Alex McIntyre Excerpts

Wednesday 18th March 2026 Westminster Hall

[Ben Maguire]

I completely agree; I have actually had some similar casework. I will come back to that point.

In a deeply troubling case brought to me by a wonderful Cornish advice clinic, a female client, who I will call Louise for this debate, was refused legal aid on the basis that she supposedly had too much disposable income and assets, despite the reality that, at the time, she was sofa surfing, effectively homeless and earning only minimum wage. Although she may have passed the merits test, she failed the means test, because she was not paying rent and was not on benefits, so the system deemed her ineligible for legal support.

After Louise fled her partner, who had reportedly abused her, both parties applied for residential custody of their child. Although the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service recommended that the child live with their mother, the judge awarded custody to the ex-partner, arguing that the mother had not followed the correct legal route when she fled from home. She is now permitted to see her child only by travelling hundreds of miles back to the area from which she fled, and the ex-partner refuses phone contact altogether. She is terrified of returning to a family court and knows from experience how one-sided the system can be, especially as her ex-partner has the money and the legal representation, while she would be forced to represent herself. How many women consider the reality that Louise currently faces and, as a result, end up staying with their abuser?

The legal aid Minister assured me that an eligibility waiver is available for victims of domestic abuse who are applying for urgent protections, such as non-molestation orders, yet a survey commissioned by the charity Surviving Economic Abuse found that more survivors had to represent themselves in legal proceedings than were able to access legal aid. The Ministry of Justice’s own harm report found:

“The most important and frequently mentioned form of structural disadvantage was lack of access to legal representation.”

Most cases I have reviewed end with a victim—whose abuse has not yet reached so-called dangerous levels—applying for a child protection order, anti-stalking order or non-molestation order, which means they do not qualify to skip the legal aid means test. On the contrary, victims will be assessed on their income through a test that has not been uprated with inflation since 2009.

An applicant is not eligible for legal aid if their monthly disposable income exceeds £733. That threshold is clearly blind to reality. So far, the Government have chosen to ignore rising food and energy costs, as well as the huge debts that can be caused by an abuser. Even if someone has £750 left at the end of the month including those costs, which is farcical, the fact that solicitors can cost anything from £120 an hour to £400 or £500 an hour speaks volumes about the poorly executed calculations that are applied to the legal aid means test threshold.

[Alex McIntyre (Gloucester) (Lab)]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his support for my Domestic Abuse (Safe Leave) Bill, which he has backed from the start. He is making a very powerful point about the role that businesses can play in supporting victims and survivors of domestic abuse, who are the reason why we are all here and who we care so much about. Does he agree that we should be doing more to encourage businesses to support women fleeing from domestic abuse, such as through the roundtable that I hosted recently with Women’s Aid, Airbnb and AXA? Does he also agree that the response from Travelodge this week has been simply shameful and that, quite frankly, it has failed to tackle violence against women and girls in one of its properties?

[Ben Maguire]

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on being such a champion on this issue, and I completely agree with his condemnation of Travelodge’s frankly despicable response. His point regarding Airbnb is interesting, and I have been making the same point recently, because it crosses over with the Travelodge issue.

I am sure that many Members have heard from survivors in their constituencies who tell them they have spent all their savings on legal fees or they have accrued tens of thousands of pounds worth of debt. We know that survivors often face crippling financial barriers when trying to protect themselves and, in many cases, their children. Would the Minister tell me why the review period for the threshold has not yet been changed and why the gap between those who are eligible for legal aid and those who can afford to pay for legal services has not received closer scrutiny during the means test review?

The previous Government completed their review in 2022 and then proposed new criteria in 2023. Implementation was later delayed and, as far as I am aware, the current Government have not yet indicated that they intend to progress the work. I would therefore appreciate an update from the Minister on the status of the legal aid means test review.

I welcome the Government’s steps to include economic abuse in the Domestic Abuse Act, but claiming that if a victim can prove they are economically abused, they will become exempt from the means test is a bit like asking victims who are under a severe threat to their health—in the most vulnerable state of their life—to sift through a haystack to find a purposefully and impossibly well-hidden needle. The £100,000 capital exemption recently introduced for the means test has been powerfully rejected by Women’s Aid and domestic abuse charities, which say that it does not go nearly far enough.

Sitting on a £1 million property that is co-owned with their perpetrator, who—guess what?—will not sell, excludes someone from any legal support. Such trapped capital should not be included in the financial eligibility calculation. I would go as far as stating that such inaccessible capital should be exempt from the means test, particularly as many victims are too afraid to leave their homes with their children as they are not certain that the family courts will bring them a positive outcome, as I have highlighted in Louise’s case.

According to the Surviving Economic Abuse 2026 report, almost 1 million women in the UK who experienced economic abuse last year said that the abuse prevented them from leaving their dangerous abuser. In the worst-case scenario, that decision, which is forced on them via our systematic failure to understand the reality of domestic abuse for victims, can be fatal. Another recent study covering a 12-year period, which included 400 homicide reviews, found that one person died every 19 days in cases that involved economic abuse. In other words, every three weeks a victim dies because an abuser uses economic abuse as a tool of control.

Refuge recently evidenced how 75 women were killed as a result of domestic homicide in the year ending 2025. Those numbers should spark outrage across our society. This final act of violence could have been prevented had there been proper legal resources in place for victims, or proper housing support that meant victims could be safe. Too many victims are forced to return to their perpetrators because they do not receive the levels of legal support needed to continue with the legal process. That means that many are unable to obtain things such as protective orders against their perpetrator, or obtain safe child contact arrangements.

Victims could even end up homeless. Those brave victim survivors who do leave their homes and apply for urgent homelessness protection can receive immediate legal support, but they end up having to go through the legal aid means test. If they are seen to have an income above the threshold, they have to support their own legal representation, when it is actually their abuser who has forced them out. Victims therefore become stuck between staying in their family home and enduring their suffering, or ending up potentially homeless—due to, again, this destructive means test.

A Cornish women’s protection centre recently reached out to me, detailing the following case that it was dealing with—for which I have again changed the name. Katy’s ex-partner abused and controlled her, both during and after their relationship ended. The ex-partner controlled contact with their children and locked Katy out of their property, resulting in her sleeping on the streets. During the family court process, which lasted 18 months, Katy had no legal aid or legal advice, and minimal support throughout the court proceedings, representing herself at the family court.

Eventually, the judge granted a non-molestation order, an occupation order, a prohibited steps order, and a full care order for the children. However, after achieving that without any access to legal advice, Katy and her children have still not been given access to their home and remain homeless. Reporting by Women’s Aid reinforces this reality. Survivors frequently cannot secure a legal aid solicitor due to the combined effects of eligibility barriers and a national shortage of legal aid providers. That leaves many women unable to challenge refusals, missing deadlines and remaining in unsafe or unsuitable accommodation because they cannot navigate the process alone.

All of that continues despite official homelessness data showing that large numbers of households become homeless or are threatened with homelessness due to domestic abuse, which means they should be treated as vulnerable and properly protected, not forced through a rigid financial test that was never designed for people fleeing violence.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jess Phillips]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. I was also—I feel like I have been here for ages—part of work with Surviving Economic Abuse, which the hon. Member for North Cornwall mentioned a number of times, to amend the Domestic Abuse Act to ensure that our legislation with respect to controlling or coercive behaviour included behaviour post-separation, because of the level of risk for people post-separation, which both my hon. Friend and the hon. Member alluded to. Over the years, there has been quite a lot of investment in getting somebody out in a crisis, rather than addressing the massive issues that occur in people’s lives afterwards. It is as if we tick a box when somebody leaves their home, and do not think about all the ramifications in their lives. My hon. Friend and I have worked very closely on that issue with regard to the family court and the presumption of contact, which has also been mentioned.

[Alex McIntyre]

Before she moves on from the subject of housing, does the Minister agree that the partnership between Women’s Aid, Airbnb and the Mayor of London is a really exciting pilot project for those people for whom refuges might not be the right place?

[Jess Phillips]

I absolutely agree. When I was running refuge accommodation, we were moving from the era of everybody living in communal refuges to a new era of people needing separate accommodation. Some of that was about the rules on safeguarding with regard to which children could and could not live together, and about boys over the age of 16—actually, I think the age threshold was 14. As somebody who has adult male children, I would not want to flee to somewhere they could not live. That is hugely important.

The hon. Member for North Cornwall made a very important case for the need for legal aid thresholds. As somebody who has managed to amend our legal aid laws to carve out victims of domestic violence, I absolutely agree with him that we need to ensure that people can access the right legal services when they need them. If we had a lawyer from the Ministry of Justice in front of us, they would almost certainly be able to give a considerably more thorough answer, but there is relevant case law. For example, if someone’s asset is a house that they co-own, it cannot be included in the means test.

There are a number of issues, and we need to look at whether the threshold is right. My threshold is that I believe somebody when they tell me that they are a victim of domestic abuse, but I understand that the burden of evidence has to be slightly higher for Government Departments or legal departments. In the strategy, we have committed to addressing tenancies and the economic abuse of those who do not own houses, but who live in either social housing or privately rented properties. We have to look at the threshold for exactly what evidence is needed, and make sure that it is fair and balanced.

Oral Answers to Questions

Alex McIntyre Excerpts

Monday 9th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dr Jeevun Sandher (Loughborough) (Lab)]

4. What recent progress her Department has made on implementing the violence against women and girls strategy.

[Alex McIntyre (Gloucester) (Lab)]

11. What recent progress her Department has made on implementing the violence against women and girls strategy.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

Alongside publishing the new VAWG strategy, the Government have already launched our behaviour change campaign and rolled out domestic abuse protection orders in selected areas. We are embedding domestic abuse specialists in police control rooms under Raneem’s law and strengthening the tools available to the police and courts to safeguard victims. We have also established a national policing centre for violence against women and girls and public protection with £13.1 million of funding, and have appointed Richard Wright KC to lead a review of stalking legislation.

[Jess Phillips]

I thank my hon. Friend for his kind words—I will continue to do that for the rest of my life. Women and girls must be safe at home and in public, which is why the Government are strengthening early intervention, improving police responses, and ensuring that women facing domestic or post-separation abuse receive protection and support. We are embedding VAWG considerations into things like transport guidance, updating national design standards to ensure public spaces are safer by design. Together, these measures will make communities across England and Wales safer, including women and girls in Loughborough, Shepshed and the villages, so that they can live confidently and without fear.

[Alex McIntyre]

I recently met a survivor of domestic abuse and stalking who has repeatedly moved home and then been followed by her perpetrator. She told me of the impact, not just on her but on her son, who has repeatedly had to move schools through no fault of his own. After the last move, her perpetrator was permitted to move to a caravan park just a few miles away from her new place of safety and within a few hundred yards of where her son plays football. Although an exclusion zone was put in place, her perpetrator was permitted inside it twice a week to attend parole meetings, because asking him to travel further would be “inconvenient to him”. Can the Minister give some detail on how this Government will support victims such as the one I met recently to live safely in their homes after experiencing domestic abuse?

[Jess Phillips]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question, and I suppose I want to say from this Dispatch Box that I want that perpetrator to be inconvenienced. Inconveniencing him is exactly what we should try to do, which is why this Government are tackling perpetrators —that is essentially about shifting the focus on to those who cause harm. We are rolling out domestic abuse protection orders, removing the burden on victims by placing stronger, enforceable prohibitions and requirements on the perpetrators, such as electronic monitoring and positive requirements to keep victims safe. Importantly, a breach of that order is a criminal offence.

Oral Answers to Questions

Alex McIntyre Excerpts

Monday 5th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Alex Norris]

The hon. Gentleman shouts at me from long range—having been near him at the football, I know he has a pair of pipes on him when he wants to use them. There is a reason he does not want to hear me answer the question: he knows he will get not a three-word answer, but a serious one that says that we are going to reduce the numbers of people who need support in this country. That is how we will close the hotels.

[Alex McIntyre (Gloucester) (Lab)]

A happy new year to you and your team, Mr Speaker. I welcome the Minister’s commitment to closing the Tory asylum hotel in Gloucester by the end of this Parliament. I have raised with him in the past the plight of families who live next door to that hotel, who are having to deal with an increase in antisocial behaviour, constant protests at their front door, and YouTubers turning up and trying to get a vox-pop reaction at 11 o’clock at night. What support can we give to those families, who are having to deal with a hotel on their doorstep that they did not plan for when they moved in?

[Alex Norris]

We are very mindful that, whatever the nature of the supported accommodation, it should tread as lightly as possible on the community and on its neighbours. I would say to my hon. Friend that we are standing up capacity within the Home Office to make sure that local police are sharing information, and that we are sharing information with local police, about possible vulnerabilities, particularly in some of the cases he is talking about. If he is able to share that information with us, we can make sure that local authorities and local police, alongside the national Government, are supporting the community to the fullest degree possible.

Oral Answers to Questions

Alex McIntyre Excerpts

Monday 15th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Andrew Ranger (Wrexham) (Lab)]

8. What recent progress her Department has made on tackling antisocial behaviour.

[Alex McIntyre (Gloucester) (Lab)]

20. What recent progress her Department has made on tackling antisocial behaviour.

[The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)]

Antisocial behaviour causes untold distress and misery across our communities. Under the previous Government, the response to this menace was weak and ineffective, and visible neighbourhood policing declined dramatically. This Government are putting that right by rebuilding neighbourhood policing and introducing respect orders to tackle persistent perpetrators and stronger powers to seize dangerous and deafening off-road bikes.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sarah Jones]

As part of our commitment to restore neighbourhood policing, the neighbourhood policing programme career pathway developed by the College of Policing is creating a structured training pathway to professionalise neighbourhood policing, benefiting communities across England and Wales, including in Wrexham. In terms of recruitment, North Wales police has been allocated just over £2 million to support its projected neighbourhood policing growth over 2025-26, which is made up of 26 additional police officers and 15 police community support officers.

[Alex McIntyre]

In Gloucester, thanks to the Government investing £1 million in neighbourhood policing and a further £1 million in its safer streets initiative, we have seen more police on our streets this summer, leading to an increase in arrests and seizures of illegal e-bikes and vapes. Some of that funding is to come to an end this autumn. Will the Minister please update me on how she will ensure that Gloucestershire constabulary builds on the great work it has done this summer to make Gloucester a safer place to live and work?

[Sarah Jones]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question. It is encouraging to see the work going on in his constituency. It is our intention to ensure that the police have the resources they need to do the jobs we need them to do, whether in hotspot policing, neighbourhood policing or tackling anti-social behaviour. We will change legislation here in Parliament to ensure they have the powers as well as the resources they need to act locally in the interests of our constituents.

Borders and Asylum

Alex McIntyre Excerpts

Monday 1st September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Yvette Cooper]

This Government have, since the election, increased the number of returns of those who have no right to be here. There has been a 28% increase in returns of failed asylum seekers. We are strengthening enforcement and bringing in new counter-terrorism powers that allow us to go after the criminal gangs. Incomprehensibly, the hon. Gentleman’s party voted against those counter-terrorism powers. It seems to oppose the action that we need to take to go after the criminal gangs. If he and the Conservatives were to support the new powers, we could bring them in swiftly, in the course of a few months, and give our law enforcement the power to take stronger action against the criminal gangs. I hope that he supports the agreement with France, which provides for the immediate detention of people arriving in the UK, and their return to France. The trouble with his party’s policies is that they sound an awful lot like the previous Conservative Government’s policies, which totally failed. The Conservative Government were chaos; his party seems to be chaos on steroids. His party is not trying to solve the problem. All it is trying to do is exploit it. We need a properly controlled and managed system that goes after the criminal gangs, who should not be able to get away with their vile trade.

[Alex McIntyre (Gloucester) (Lab)]

Gloucester has a proud history as a welcoming and diverse city. Just last week, I was pleased to attend the Ukrainian independence day celebrations in my constituency with some of those who have sought refuge in our city. However, many constituents have written to me, particularly those who live next door to the asylum hotel that was opened by the last Conservative Government, with legitimate concerns about the future of that site, and the impact on them of things like protests on their front doorstep. Will the Home Secretary reassure my constituents that the policy that she has announced today will speed up the end of the use of that hotel for asylum seekers? Will she meet me to discuss the impact of such sites on local residents in Gloucester?

[Yvette Cooper]

I can tell my hon. Friend that we will end the use of asylum hotels. We will close the asylum hotels that the previous Government opened, including in his constituency; it is hugely important that we do. He is right to talk about our long history of people from across the country supporting refugees. They include the more than 100,000 families who came forward to offer homes to Ukrainians at the beginning of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. That spirit and those values are immensely important, but people need to know that the system is being properly controlled and managed, and that misuse is being tackled. That is why it is so important to end the use of asylum hotels.

Controlled Drugs (Procedure for Specification) Bill

Alex McIntyre Excerpts

Committee stage
Wednesday 25th June 2025 Public Bill Committees

[The Chair]

With this it will be convenient to consider clause 2 stand part.

[Alex McIntyre (Gloucester) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison.

Many hon. Members will be aware of the blight of drugs on our streets. The recent and ongoing emergence of novel synthetic opioids, particularly fentanyls and nitazenes, poses a particular risk to public safety and public health, not least because of their very high potency. It is those drugs that the Bill seeks to address, because with the rapid development of synthetic drugs, it is vital that new controls can come into force at the earliest opportunity to enable the police and other authorities to act in the interests of public safety.

The Bill seeks to amend the delegated power to specify controlled drugs under section 2 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, so that the form of statutory instrument is regulations made by the Secretary of State rather than an Order in Council. The statutory instrument remains subject to the draft affirmative procedure and the statutory preconditions of acting after consultation with or on the recommendation of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs.

For Members who are not aware, the UK-wide Misuse of Drugs Act is the principal legislation to control substances that are dangerous or otherwise harmful. These substances become controlled drugs by being listed and classified as class A, B or C under schedule 2 to the Act, according to their relative harmfulness, or by being specified in a temporary drug class as a drug subject to a temporary control order.

The Act imposes the criminal penalties that many of us will be aware of in relation to offences such as unlawful possession, supply, offer to supply, production, and importation and exportation of those controlled drugs. Currently, any amendment to schedule 2 to control, remove from control or amend the control of drugs is made by Order in Council—in other words, by the King in Council. Orders can also be varied or revoked by a subsequent Order in Council.

For newbies like me who are not aware of what that means, let me explain. If we are looking to add a new substance to the list, we first have to go through the draft affirmative procedure with debates and approval by both Houses of Parliament. A statutory instrument then has to be made at the Privy Council and will come into force on a specified date, which is generally 28 days later. Given that the Privy Council generally meets only once each month, and not at all during recess, this means that it will be an additional four to six weeks following the debates in Parliament for a substance to be controlled under the law. In the interim, that means the police have limited powers to tackle those substances and are not able to throw the full force of the law at individuals supplying or possessing those substances, which, as we know, are very dangerous to public safety.

The Bill is very short. Clause 1 seeks to amend the 1971 Act by removing the requirement for an Order in Council so that any amendment to the list of controlled drugs under schedule 2 would require only debates in both Houses under the draft affirmative procedure. Importantly, the clause continues to state that the Secretary of State can act only following consultation with or on the recommendation of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs. In terms of its impact and effect, the Bill is limited to that area.

Clause 2 is even shorter, providing that the Bill extends to England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, which is very standard.

The Committee will be pleased to hear that we are not expecting the debate to be too long, and I recommend that all members of the Committee vote in favour of the Bill.

[Cameron Thomas (Tewkesbury) (LD)]

I support the Bill in the context of my liberalism. For years, the Liberal Democrats have campaigned for better access to medicinal cannabis for those who rely on it to manage their symptoms. The current system is too restrictive and necessitates a more compassionate, patient-centred approach to ensure that nobody is left to suffer unnecessarily. The Government should investigate the merits of permitting general practice to prescribe cannabis-based products.

That said, this retired military police officer does not find his liberal values to be at odds with the Bill. In fact, the Bill increases protections for citizens from dangerous substances and simplifies and shortens the control systems set out in the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.

--- Later in debate ---

[Alex McIntyre]

I thank every hon. Member who contributed to this debate. I am grateful to my right hon. Friend the Minister and the Government for supporting the Bill. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington North, who is a fierce campaigner in this area, for discussing mental health, drugs and related policy areas.

The hon. Member for West Dorset is entirely correct in saying that this place has far too many arcane rules and procedures. If we remove them one at a time, we may be here for a long while, but we should do so none the less.

My hon. Friend the Member for North Somerset brings a wealth of expertise as a pharmacist, and I am grateful for his support for the Bill. I am sure the Minister will have heard what the hon. Member for Tewkesbury, who is my constituency neighbour, said about medicinal cannabis, and I am sure that he and his party will continue to campaign on the issue.

In these 15 minutes or so, the Committee has had a good opportunity to debate this short and technical, but none the less important, Bill. It is important to my constituents that we tackle the war on drugs and protect vulnerable people while ensuring that criminals are behind bars.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause 1 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

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

[Alex McIntyre]

I think this is where I am meant to stand up and thank the Clerks, the Committee members, the Doorkeepers and Hansard—I know it has been a long and arduous process to get to this point. I look forward to the Bill’s further progress. I also thank you, Dr Murrison.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill accordingly to be reported, without amendment.

International Women�s Day

Alex McIntyre Excerpts

Thursday 6th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Alex McIntyre (Gloucester) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Brent East (Dawn Butler) for bringing this important debate to the House.

It is vital that we honour International Women�s Day to not only recognise the remarkable achievements of women in my city of Gloucester and across the country, but accelerate the drive for equality that is still so desperately needed. Sadly, far too many women come to my surgeries with harrowing experiences of discrimination in the workplace, inequalities in the healthcare system and violence and domestic abuse at home. Many are deeply concerned about the alarming rise in violence, and last year, sadly, we saw sexual and domestic abuse and violence reach record levels in Gloucester.

On the latter point, I am proud to have presented my ten-minute rule Bill earlier this year, which seeks to provide victims and survivors of domestic abuse with the right to access 10 days of paid safe leave. I have had the privilege of working with employers and organisations such as the Hollie Gazzard Trust, Women�s Aid, FearFree, SafeLives and the Gloucestershire Domestic Abuse Support Service to develop that Bill. We know that one in four women will experience domestic abuse in their lifetime, meaning that the Bill will help many women to rebuild their lives, and I encourage the Government to add that to their mission.

The theme for this year�s International Women�s Day is �Accelerate Action�, and I am encouraged by the Government�s commitment to do just that. We have committed to an ambitious plan to halve violence against women and girls by introducing Raneem�s law; protecting victims of stalking, domestic abuse and harassment; criminalising spiking; improving healthcare and maternity services, particularly for women of colour, and closing the racial mortality gap; tackling sex-based discrimination at work; supporting women during maternity and the menopause; and closing the gender pay gap.

I would like to take this moment to celebrate some of the inspirational women in my city, including the fantastic Gloucester-Hartpury women�s rugby team, who go for their third successive title next Sunday; my good friend Mary Smith, the only female leader of Gloucester city council in the past 30 years; Carol Francis, the first black female councillor in Gloucester, who continues to champion her community; Zafeera Karim, who as the Member of the Youth Parliament for Gloucester and the Forest of Dean gave a brilliant speech in this House just last week; and Julie Kent, who founded the charity Emily�s Gift and will soon become high sheriff.

Earlier this year, we lost Baroness Sally Oppenheim-Barnes, who died in January after years of service to our city. We also thank other inspirational women for their service to Gloucester and the wider county as they step down this year, including Sally Byng at the Barnwood Trust, Anne Whitworth at the Gloucester Law Centre, Sue Cunningham at GL Communities and Mary Hutton at the Gloucestershire integrated care board. I echo the comments of the hon. Member for Bridgwater (Sir Ashley Fox) about the Nelson Trust, which does brilliant work in my constituency. I will continue to use my position in this House to celebrate the successes of women in Gloucester, but also to advocate for a brighter future for women, which I hope we can all agree will lead to a brighter future for Gloucester and for our country.

Oral Answers to Questions

Alex McIntyre Excerpts

Monday 24th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Yvette Cooper]

The Government have been clear that the focus of policing must be on the neighbourhood crimes that blight our communities. That is why we are increasing neighbourhood policing, because the Conservative party slashed the number of neighbourhood police on the beat and we lost thousands of neighbourhood police in our communities. That is why we are also focusing the police on serious violence. The legislation to be introduced tomorrow will focus on tackling serious violence and dealing with the most serious crimes in our communities—something that the Conservative party, which presided over a 61% increase in shoplifting alone during its last two years in power, failed time and again to do.

[Alex McIntyre (Gloucester) (Lab)]

4. What steps her Department is taking to help tackle domestic abuse in Gloucester.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

The Government are determined to tackle the scourge of domestic abuse wherever it is found. That is why we have already announced bold measures to transform the policing response to these devastating crimes. Last week, I am proud to say, we embedded the first domestic abuse specialists in 999 control rooms in five police forces, under Raneem’s law, and we plan to equip forces everywhere with the tools they need to crack down on perpetrators and keep victims safe, including in Gloucester.

[Alex McIntyre]

I thank my hon. Friend for her answer, and for all the work she has done over many years to champion victims and survivors of domestic abuse. As she will know, one of the biggest challenges facing survivors and victims in Gloucester is the financial implications of fleeing that abuse. Will she agree to meet me to discuss my 10-minute rule Bill, the Domestic Abuse (Safe Leave) Bill, which would introduce safe leave for victims of domestic abuse and violence?

[Jess Phillips]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his kind words, and for his commitment to supporting victims. He will be aware that his private Member’s Bill is the responsibility of the Department for Business and Trade, but I would of course be willing to meet him, and the Department, to discuss it.

Violence against Women and Girls

Alex McIntyre Excerpts

Wednesday 27th November 2024 Westminster Hall

[Alex McIntyre (Gloucester) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark. I thank the hon. Member for Poplar and Limehouse (Apsana Begum) for securing this important debate. On Monday, we marked White Ribbon Day, a global campaign to end violence against women and girls. The statistics are stark: every 10 minutes a woman is killed by a partner or family member somewhere in the world, and in the UK a woman is killed by an abusive partner every five days. The police receive a call related to domestic abuse every 30 seconds, and by the time that I finish this speech, four women will have made that call. The data paints a clear picture. Everyone in this room will know a woman who has been affected by this issue, and sadly it is on the rise. The theme of this year’s White Ribbon Day is “It Starts with Men”, and it starts here with men calling out unacceptable misogyny and violence.

In Gloucester, domestic abuse and sexual assault reached record levels last year, and across the county we saw an increase of nearly 2,000 more domestic abuse-related crimes. Earlier this month, I held a roundtable with local organisations, such as the Hollie Gazzard Trust, FearFree and the Gloucestershire Domestic Abuse Support Service, to discuss how we can tackle violence against women and girls, domestic abuse and stalking in Gloucester. The issue is complex, but we must prevent violence against women, ensure that women are supported to leave domestically abusive relationships, and provide the support needed for women facing all types of gender-based violence and stalking.

I am pleased that the Government are committed to halving violence against women within a decade, and I am pleased that they are working to improve police responses and ensure faster justice for survivors. As well as the recent introduction of workplace sexual harassment laws, I welcome new protections for victims of stalking, and to make spiking a criminal offence—something that my predecessor worked hard on. All those measures will help keep my constituents safe and ensure that the women of Gloucester feel safe and supported. Together, we can create a society where women and girls are no longer subjected to fear, abuse or violence. Together, we can end violence against women and girls.