Asked by: Alison Bennett (Liberal Democrat - Mid Sussex)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment he has made of the benefits of extending protections for retail workers to retail delivery drivers in the Crime and Policing Bill.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Home Office)
Under the previous government, shop theft soared to record highs, with more and more offenders using violence and abuse against shopworkers. We won’t stand for this because everybody has a right to feel safe at their place of work.
To tackle the unacceptable surge in shoplifting and retail crime, and following years of campaigning, our Crime and Policing Bill introduces a standalone offence of assaulting a retail worker to protect the hardworking and dedicated staff that work in stores, sending a strong message to offenders and would-be offenders that violence against retail workers will not be tolerated.
As introduced, the definition of a ‘retail worker’ does not include delivery drivers. Keeping a tight definition provides legal clarity and ensures there is less ambiguity for courts in identifying whether an individual is a retail worker and impacted during their job. Workers whose roles are not included are already covered under other legislation such as the Offences against the Person Act 1861, which also covers more serious violence, such as actual bodily harm (ABH) and grievous bodily harm (GBH).
That said, the whole purpose of the parliamentary process is to scrutinise the provisions in the Bill and we will, of course, consider carefully any amendments and supporting evidence.
Public-facing workers are also covered by the aggravating factor introduced by the Police, Crime, Courts and Sentencing Act, which ensures the courts consider the public-facing nature of a victim’s role when issuing a sentence for an offence and sends a clear message that violence and abuse towards any worker will not be tolerated. We expect those who perpetrate these damaging crimes to always face the full force of the law.
Through the passage of this Bill, we will continue to engage with a number of stakeholders across relevant sectors to ensure the law is fit for purpose to protect all public-facing workers from violence and abuse.
Asked by: Alison Bennett (Liberal Democrat - Mid Sussex)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether money spent on the UK and Rwanda Migration and Economic Development Partnership has been distributed to M23 militias in the Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo.
Answered by Angela Eagle - Minister of State (Home Office)
Under the previous government’s Migration and Economic Development Partnership (MEDP) with Rwanda, an Economic Transformation and Integration Fund was agreed to support the Government of Rwanda to achieve its Vision 2050 and National Strategy for Transformation 1 development strategies, which are intended to support sustainable and inclusive economic growth within Rwanda and improve the conditions of the existing refugee population and host communities, including in areas such as education, healthcare, agriculture, infrastructure, and job creation.
Further costs relating to the MEDP have been published here: Breakdown of Home Office costs associated with the MEDP with Rwanda and the Illegal Migration Act 2023 - GOV.UK.
Asked by: Alison Bennett (Liberal Democrat - Mid Sussex)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps her Department is taking to ensure the protection of personal data in the context of Apple’s withdrawal of Advanced Data Protection.
Answered by Dan Jarvis - Minister of State (Home Office)
The UK has a strong track record of protecting people’s privacy whilst also ensuring action can be taken against child sexual abusers and terrorists.
The Investigatory Powers Act contains robust safeguards and independent oversight to protect privacy and ensure that data is only obtained on an exceptional basis and only when it is necessary and proportionate to do so.
The Home Office does not comment on operational matters. This has been the longstanding position of successive UK Governments for reasons of national security.