Knife Crime in London

Andy Slaughter Excerpts

Wednesday 12th February 2025 Westminster Hall

[Luke Taylor]

I could not agree more. I was interested to hear the hon. Member’s speech the other day about including council enforcement officers in these hubs, too. Having them present in the community and accessible to residents is incredibly important. I am keen to have a conversation with him about the measures that he has achieved.

To follow exactly the point the hon. Member just made, at the time when we should be getting more police embedded in communities to halt knife crime, we have instead let numbers crater. We know that research consistently shows violent crime dropping significantly in areas where the police are present, visible and proactive.

In December 2023, when, tragically, a knife cut short the life of a young man in my constituency, Ilyas Habibi, who was just 17, he was just minutes away from a local police station. Just as worrying is that the fact that in my constituency and across London, we see safer neighbourhood officers being abstracted from their beats—a quirk of the Met police set-up that results in vital officers who should be on our streets, making our neighbourhoods safer, being pulled away for major police operational events, typically in central London. It is, in effect, robbing outer London to pay inner London and it has to stop. These officers want to be doing great work in the community, but the failure to recruit across the Met is letting them and, by extension, us down.

There can be no doubt that recruiting into the Met is challenging. The Casey report outlined the scale of the failures that have occurred in recent years far better than any of us can—the failures to get a grip on damaging internal cultures, to protect the victims of crime, and overall to carry the confidence of the very communities they serve. I have met Commissioner Rowley and I acknowledge his undertakings to reform the Met. Nobody in this place can pretend that his role is easy; we must recognise that he needs the full backing of Government to reinvigorate the force and repair its image.

As yesterday’s ruling on vetting clearance and dismissals shows, the hurdles in front of these reforms are immense, and the single greatest tool to smash through those hurdles is the powers that the Secretary of State holds. To bolster a new Met for London and drive knife crime down, it should be a priority of this Government to expedite the reforms we all know the Met needs. Without these reforms, how can we expect recruitment to bounce back? I urge the Minister to today outline what steps the Government are taking to get back to proper community policing, to work with the Metropolitan police to reduce abstraction rates, and to support Commissioner Rowley as he embarks on his package of reforms.

We cannot look to policing alone, though. The whole-of-society approach that is so desperately needed will require an “it takes a village” attitude, and requires a Government committed to supporting early intervention initiatives. A key first step is diversionary programmes, which we know can cut out knife crime before it can metastasise across our streets. The targeted early help and integrated support teams at Sutton borough council do excellent work with young people in my constituency. Their approach is targeted; once a potential young offender reprimanded by the police is brought to their attention, they work tirelessly to build positive relationships with the child to stop the otherwise steady and depressing downward spiral into criminality. It is vital to remember that these schemes offer opportunities to young people who are often not afforded the luxury of such attention elsewhere in their lives.

In London, these intervention programmes rely heavily on grants from the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime, the Ministry of Justice and the violence reduction unit, but youth services across London often face uncertainty about how and when these grants will be allocated. The team we spoke to at Sutton council is still waiting to see if its grant will be approved for March, which is only a few weeks’ time. In addition, these grants are typically only allocated for 18-month to two-year periods, leaving little space for local authorities to plan ahead.

All the evidence shows that young people susceptible to committing this form of violence require sustained relationships with skilled youth workers to help them to choose safer paths. Such a relationship can take months to form, but it acts as a critical antidote to the peer pressure and social circumstances that are otherwise weighing on the child. It is therefore utterly misguided to continue with this short-termism. Skilled youth workers are deterred from engaging in local authority work due to temporary contract conditions and the lingering threat of grant termination, which could see the shattering of crucial relationships between London’s youth workers and young people at risk of committing knife-related offences. I am therefore keen to hear from the Minister whether she will consider ringfencing funding for local authority early intervention services in London. Without multi-year funding to improve planning and put these services on a more stable footing, this vital first step in preventing knife crime will fall by the wayside.

Backing early intervention is just one of the arrows in the quiver of a wider approach that we must shift to. Young people will continue to die if we do not take heed of our Scottish counterparts and finally embrace a public health approach. Famously, Glasgow took thousands of knives off the streets, and rallied organisations at every level to intervene before a crime was committed. That approach breaks down the silo walls between bodies, putting teachers, A&E doctors, social workers, sports clubs and many more stakeholders in partnership with law enforcement.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith and Chiswick) (Lab)]

The hon. Gentleman is making an excellent speech, and he has identified that there is no one solution to this. The Scotland example shows what can be done, but there are some practical measures that can be taken. For example, half of all homicides with sharp instruments are done with kitchen knives, and that simply has not been tackled. It might be tackled, or the problem might at least be alleviated, by encouraging the transition to blunted knives rather than pointed knives. Does he support that?

[Luke Taylor]

Introducing blunted knives is a very good example of thinking differently about this crime. The tabloid approach of looking for popular, big and visible solutions, such as banning zombie knives, while important, often ignores the statistics of how crimes are most often committed. The hon. Gentleman makes a good point, so I thank him.

The public health approach sees the problem of knife crime in three dimensions and recognises that violence begets violence like an illness. Returning to my argument that violent crime is like a virus, I remind hon. Members that when a contagious, dangerous virus broke out in this country half a decade ago, we rallied every aspect of civil society to fight it. Public services, the police and the third sector were all brought together to work as partners rather than in silos. Implicitly, we recognise that this is the right way to tackle an emergency that threatens life and limb, so why do we fail so consistently to bring that approach to bear in dealing with knife crime in the capital?

A hallmark of this approach is the creation of violence reduction units and the provision of serious financial support by Government to make them the hubs of proactive action they need to be. In London, we have done the first part by creating a violence reduction unit in 2018, but its potential remains woefully unrealised. The Centre for Crime and Justice Studies told me that it fears that the unit remains limited in its ability to engage with wider civil society and is still entangled in the paradigm of enforcement rather than engagement. Funding for the VRUs, including the one in London, is just too low to make this strategy a reality, so it should surprise none of us that it has not borne fruit.

There is a wider problem in that politicians of all stripes have paid lip service to the idea of a public health approach, but have utterly failed to implement it. The last Conservative Government, keen to be seen to do something, embraced the language of public health and crime reduction, but we have seen none of this effectively put into practice. Instead, they piloted controversial new powers that increased suspicionless stop and search, which evidently did little to stop knife crime, although the findings from the pilots have yet to be brought before Parliament.

It just is not good enough—not for mothers, fathers, brothers and sisters all over London whose lives have been ripped apart by knife crime. They deserve a public health approach. We must join up public bodies, the police and the third sector so that young people are supported before they slip through the cracks. We have to consider the principles of restorative practice, too, because they underlie and echo everything that is good about the public health approach.

Earlier this week, I met with Ray and Vi Donovan, who lost their son in a violent attack in 2001. In his memory, they created and have for many years run the award-winning Chris Donovan Trust, which works with police, public bodies and charities across the board to highlight the value of restorative justice in preventing reoffending. They told me that their work takes the restorative principles not just into prisons but schools. That approach, which is grounded in embedding empathy and victim awareness in young people, is like a light in the dark in London It awakens in young people on the cusp of gang life, and even in young people already drowning silently within it, an awareness that carrying a knife will inevitably one day ruin their life and the lives of others. Restorative practice is too often overlooked, even as part of the wider package of public health reforms to tackle crime, yet it is vital to winning the war for the hearts and minds of young people at risk of picking up a knife.

Will the Minister consider putting victim awareness on the curriculum? I encourage the Government to publish all the findings from the serious violence reduction orders that were trialled by the last Government, as well as detailed conclusions about the impact of suspicionless stop and search trials under the knife crime prevention orders. If these punitive and controversial methods worked, surely this information would have already been shared; none the less, Parliament deserves to see the findings in writing, so that we can hasten the end of this troubled approach and speed up the saving of young lives through a better approach, grounded in public health.

Too many young people are being failed before they even set foot into adulthood, and Londoners have had enough of senseless stabbing after senseless stabbing, but the truth at the heart of this crisis is that people carry knives because they fear becoming a victim themselves. The only way to combat that climate of fear is with a public health approach that actually gets results. I reminded the House earlier this month, and I do so again now, that success in this area is measured in something more important than profit or efficiency; it is measured in lives saved, lives nourished and lives reinvigorated.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Minister for Policing, Fire and Crime Prevention (Dame Diana Johnson)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship this morning, Mr Efford.

I thank the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Luke Taylor) for securing this very important debate. I think that we both took part in a Westminster Hall debate a little while ago about knife crime in the west midlands, which was another important opportunity to shine a light on this very concerning problem.

I want to mention the other hon. Members who have spoken, too. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) talked about zero tolerance, my hon. Friend the Member for Ilford South (Jas Athwal) talked about how important it is to have the police in our communities, because they are vital to keeping those communities safe, and my hon. Friend the Member for Hammersmith and Chiswick (Andy Slaughter) talked about practical suggestions to address knife crime. I have said before that I am willing to look at any of the issues that might help us to address knife crime.

[Andy Slaughter]

I am grateful to the Minister for being so generous with her time, as she was in meeting the safer knives group to discuss this issue. I am not expecting a policy position today, but perhaps she could say when the Government are likely to come forward with proposals on the scourge of knife crime that is affecting us.

[Dame Diana Johnson]

It is fair to say that we are looking constantly at what more we can do. Although I cannot give a timetable, perhaps I can reassure my hon. Friend by saying that the issue is under active consideration, and we are keen to look at evidence and consider what more we might be able to do on the particular point that I know he is interested in.

The hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam powerfully illustrated the depth of concern about knife crime, and I am grateful for this opportunity to set out the Government’s approach to tackling it. It is important to say that it is a whole-of-Government approach, which fits very well within our safer streets mission and with our clear objective to halve knife crime over the course of the next 10 years.

Before I talk a little more about the particular policies that we will adopt, I want to remind all hon. Members that we must keep at the forefront of our minds the people who are directly affected by this dangerous and, in the worst cases, deadly threat. The victims of knife crime and their loved ones must all be in our thoughts and prayers, today and always. I was really interested to hear about the excellent work of the Chris Donovan Trust. I really would like to find out more about that, and perhaps meet the trust to see what more I can do to support it.

First and foremost, as I said, this has to be about keeping people safe. It is about ensuring that more families do not go through the agony of that empty chair at the dining table. The tragic truth is that knife crime destroys lives and, too often, young lives with futures that should have been filled with hope and potential are lost. That is why we described it as a national crisis in our manifesto and why, as I said, we set ourselves the aim of halving knife crime in a decade, as part of the safer streets mission.

I will talk a little about the coalition to tackle knife crime, to set the context. The Prime Minister launched the coalition in September. It brings together campaign groups, families of those who have tragically lost their lives to knife crime, young people who have been impacted, and community leaders—united in their mission to save lives. We are very pleased that there is representation from London in the coalition. It will work with the Government to help us identify the children and young people at risk of being affected by knife crime. It will help us to design policy changes and reforms based on the best possible evidence and, most importantly, tackle the root causes of knife crime.

I heard what the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam said about the importance of education. I recently wrote to the Secretary of State for Education about the curriculum review, including on relationships and sex education, to ensure that knife crime and what it means can be part of that review. I must also say to the hon. Gentleman that, to be frank, half an hour is not long enough for this debate, so I will take away a number of his asks and come back to him with information and a way forward.

When it comes to tackling this most dangerous of threats, it is essential that we have resources going into our neighbourhood policing. Few things matter more than the presence of community policing, to which my hon. Friend the Member for Ilford South referred. That is why the restoration of neighbourhood policing is at the heart of our plans to reform policing, and why we have committed to delivering an additional 13,000 police officers, PCSOs and specials in neighbourhood policing roles.

As the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam will know, as part of the police settlement, we have doubled to £200 million the amount of money going into neighbourhood policing for next year to kick-start the neighbourhood policing guarantee. That will apply to the Metropolitan police as well. I heard loud and clear his concerns about abstraction, but the neighbourhood policing guarantee is about those additional officers who will be in neighbourhoods. They will not be abstracted. There will be a named police officer that the community can reach out to.

I absolutely agree with the hon. Gentleman that the Metropolitan police faces some very big challenges. It is important to note that progress has been made on the “A New Met for London” plan. In recent weeks, the Met came out of the “engage” process with the police inspectorate, so progress is being made. As a Minister, I have regular meetings with the Metropolitan Police Commissioner and other officers to ensure that the Home Office is providing all that we can to support Sir Mark in his work.

This morning, I heard Sir Mark on the radio talking about the judicial review case yesterday. I assure the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam that work is ongoing to deal with the particular issue that Sir Mark was talking about this morning. I think we all agree that we want to have police officers—in the Met and every police force—who are able to do their job effectively and are properly vetted, and that anyone who cannot hold vetting as a police officer should not be in the police force. Please rest assured that that work is ongoing.

I want to talk a little bit about Young Futures, which the Government are putting forward as part of the solution to knife crime. Too many children and young people today face poorer life outcomes, including becoming involved in knife crime, because they are not effectively identified and supported early enough through early intervention. To address that issue, we have committed to creating the Young Futures programme, which will establish a network of Young Futures hubs and Young Futures prevention partnerships to intervene earlier to ensure that this cohort is identified and offered support, as well as creating more opportunities for young people in their communities through the provision of open access to, for example, mental health, careers and mentoring support.

Young Futures hubs will bring together the support services that tackle the underlying needs of vulnerable children and young people, making them more accessible to those who need them. The hubs will promote children’s and young people’s development, improve their mental health and wellbeing, and prevent them from being drawn into crime.

Young Futures prevention partnerships will bring together key partners in local areas across England and Wales to identify vulnerable children and young people at risk of being drawn into crime, map local youth service provision, and offer support in a more systematic way to divert them. I also note the comments that the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam made about securing funding for the long term, and I will reflect on those.

I also want to mention violence reduction units. One of the issues that we face, especially in the prevention sphere, is the number of agencies that are involved. By bringing together partners and mobilising them behind the same goals at local level, violence reduction units perform a really important role. In response to the drivers of violence and knife crime, they have been delivering a range of early intervention and prevention programmes to support young people away from a life of crime, including activity across all 32 boroughs through the London crime prevention fund, enabling the local adoption of a public health approach and borough-level violence reduction interventions.

Violence reduction unit programmes span from police custody to the community—some of which Members might have seen featured in Idris Elba’s recent knife crime documentary for the BBC. They include the excellent work under way at the Royal London hospital, which I had the great privilege of visiting yesterday. I met the dedicated team of youth workers who provide support to young people at a critical teachable moment—when they are admitted for violent injuries—and provide positive routes out. The confirmed police funding settlement for next year includes over £49 million for the continuation of this work to prevent serious violence, delivered through violence reduction units. In London, that amounts to £9.4 million, which was announced yesterday.

The Labour Government have also made a commitment on youth offending team referrals for young knife carriers. We are working closely with the Ministry of Justice to deliver that manifesto commitment to ensure that every young person found in possession of a knife is referred to a youth offending team, with mandatory plans in place. That can include electronic monitoring and custody where appropriate to prevent reoffending.

The hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam referred to stop and search, which is an important tool. I am well aware of issues around different communities being searched in different ways, but, used in an intelligence-led way, it can be very fair and effective. It is worth reflecting on the fact that in the 12 months to March 2024, stop and search led to 4,048 offensive weapons and firearms being found by the police in London. It has its place in the arsenal that the police can access.

We have already started to deal with some other issues around knives. For example, we have implemented a ban on zombie knives and zombie-style machetes, which came into force on 24 September. We have consulted on a ban on ninja swords, and we hope to bring that forward shortly. We have had Commander Stephen Clayman at the National Police Chiefs’ Council leading a review of online sales, and the Home Secretary has announced in the last few weeks that the Government intend to strengthen age verification controls and checks for all online sellers of knives at the point of purchase and on delivery. We have also consulted on introducing personal liability measures on senior executives of online platforms or marketplaces who fail to take action to remove illegal content relating to knives and offensive weapons.

I thank the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam for securing this important debate. I think we are all seeking the same outcomes: a reduction in knife crime and safer streets. Those objectives are central to the Government’s plan for change, and we will do everything in our power to achieve them.

Motion lapsed (Standing Order No. 10(6)).

Violent Disorder

Andy Slaughter Excerpts

Monday 2nd September 2024 Commons Chamber

[Yvette Cooper]

I welcome the shadow Home Secretary’s words of support for the Southport families and his reassertion that there can be no excuse for violent disorder, but I have to say that the rest of his response sounded an awful lot more like a pitch to Tory party members in the middle of a leadership election than a serious response to the scale of the disorder we saw and the need for a serious policing response.

He asked about the strategic reserve—the “standing army”. We set up the strategic reserve and it was in place for the second weekend; we had thousands of police officers who were ready. We did not use the old arrangements that we inherited from him, where mutual aid had to be on call and stood up in a rush when it was called for. We got the police public order officers ready and deployed at strategic locations around the country, so they could move fast and be where they were needed.

That goes to the heart of the problems we inherited from the shadow Home Secretary and his predecessor. The central co-ordination that he had left in place was far too weak. The chief officers involved in trying to get mutual aid in place and to co-ordinate intelligence had very weak infrastructure and systems in place. They had not been supported over very many years. In fact, some of his predecessors had tried to get rid of a lot of the work of the National Police Coordination Centre. Instead, our approach is to strengthen it. We believe that we should strengthen central co-ordination and we will work with the police to do so, which is why I have asked the inspectorate to operate.

Secondly, the shadow Home Secretary referred to the issues around social media. Seriously—his party delayed the Online Safety Act 2023 for years. The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, my right hon. Friend the Member for Hove and Portslade (Peter Kyle), has already been working closely on putting more pressure on the social media companies, but the shadow Home Secretary’s party did nothing for years. It is far too late for Members of his party to try to call for action. And the review into police use of force is important and will continue.

Finally, I have to say that the shadow Home Secretary is playing games, undermining the credibility of the police. He is trying to blame the Prime Minister for something that happened four years ago—saying he is somehow responsible for the violent disorder on our streets this summer—and undermining the credibility of police officers. Each individual officer takes an oath to operate without fear or favour. May I remind the right hon. Gentleman that his predecessor as Home Secretary, the right hon. and learned Member for Fareham and Waterlooville (Suella Braverman), tried to undermine and attack the credibility of the police in the run up to Armistice Day? That is why we ended up with a bunch of thugs trying to get to the Cenotaph to disrupt the service and launching violent attacks on the police. The only reason the right hon. Gentleman got the job of Home Secretary in the first place was because everyone condemned his predecessor for her behaviour. I am so sorry that he has decided, in a leadership election, to follow her example—I really thought he was better than that.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith and Chiswick) (Lab)]

May I compliment the Home Secretary and the Lord Chancellor on the robust response that the whole criminal justice system took to the recent riots and violent disorder? Was my right hon. Friend, like me, concerned about the number of very young people—pre-teen, in some cases—who took part? What does she think is the solution to rehabilitation and to preventing young people of that age becoming involved in such disgraceful behaviour in the future?

[Yvette Cooper]

My hon. Friend makes an important point about the number of young people involved. Some of them had a string of convictions—they had history—but there were also young people who were drawn into violence and disorder, sometimes antisocial behaviour and the looting of shops, or sometimes into serious violence as well. There is an important issue about how we prevent young people getting drawn into violence and antisocial behaviour. That is one of the reasons we are so determined to set up the Young Futures programme, and one of the reasons we need to look at the online radicalisation of young people as part of the extremism review.

Immigration and Home Affairs

Andy Slaughter Excerpts

Tuesday 23rd July 2024 Commons Chamber

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith and Chiswick) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to take part in the debate and to see Labour’s Home Office team in their places. May I congratulate the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Josh Babarinde) on a charming speech?

Under the previous Government, we became used to theatrical announcements of legislation on crime and punishment that went nowhere while the infrastructure of our courts and prisons decayed, so I was encouraged last week to hear the straightforward way in which the Lord Chancellor made her statement on the prison population. The overcrowding of prisons is a problem that the Labour Government inherited, and a problem that they intend to solve. The early release scheme run by the previous Administration was chaotic: the probation service was completely overstretched and prisoners were being released without support.

I have spoken before in the House about the appalling conditions in our prisons, most recently after a visit to Wormwood Scrubs prison, which is sadly no longer in my constituency. I visited the Scrubs with the previous prisons Minister, the right hon. Member for Melton and Syston (Edward Argar). Despite the best efforts of governors and staff, we were met with overcrowding, doubling up in single cells with unshielded toilets, 23-hour lock-ups and a building subject to extremes of temperature due to antiquated heating and cooling systems. Is it any wonder that with the prison population so high and conditions near uninhabitable, prison as a rehabilitative exercise is a thing of the past? One might think that the squalor and violence that blight many prisons acts as a deterrent; in fact, it ingrains and normalises the culture of offending and reoffending.

I welcome the announcements from the Government and the Home Secretary in the knife crime action plan. It is right that we ban the sale of zombie knives, ninja swords and machetes, but there is another angle to this. Home Office homicide statistics show that more than 40% of all deaths from knife attacks are caused by kitchen knives. Two years ago, the elderly parents of one of my constituents were stabbed to death by a man with a serious mental health condition who then killed himself. The weapon in those horrific crimes was a kitchen knife taken from his family home. In the past, I facilitated meetings between Home Office officials and campaigners calling for knives for general sale to be made with rounded tips. That is a simple but effective way of reducing deaths and serious injuries, which I hope the Government will take up.

Another problem inherited from the previous Government, and one that I know will be a top priority for the Lord Chancellor, is the courts backlog. There is a human cost to the backlog: victims of crime waiting years for justice, children trapped in limbo in the family court system, and the bereaved waiting years for inquests in the coroners courts. Those issues are inextricably linked with other failings of the previous Government, including the systematic destruction of legal aid resulting in a chronic shortage of legal aid providers, an unprecedented barristers’ strike, and courts in such a bad state of disrepair that they are unable to function. All of us who have been involved in the legal profession know how important the role of legal aid and early advice is, and we look forward to the full implementation of the Bellamy review.

There are many more problems within the justice system that this Government will seek to address over the next few years. The Criminal Cases Review Commission must be made fit for purpose. Here again, the Lord Chancellor has already taken action. The terrible mistake in devising and expanding imprisonment for public protection must be unwound. Anti-SLAPP legislation is needed to protect free speech. It would also be good to see the implementation of Lord Leveson’s proposals for low-cost arbitration in media cases.

Finally, I know that the Lord Chancellor is committed to introducing all aspects of the proposed Hillsborough law, alongside legal aid to victims of state actors, to create a level playing field in inquests and inquiries. A welcome addition would be the national oversight mechanism proposed by Inquest and other campaign groups to ensure that inquiry recommendations are actually implemented.

It is a great relief to know that justice and home affairs issues are back at the top of the Government’s list of priorities. I have no doubt that this Labour Government will achieve the change they promise, and I am looking forward to working with colleagues to help make that happen.

Arrests and Prison Capacity

Andy Slaughter Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd May 2024 Commons Chamber

[Chris Philp]

I can answer the hon. Lady’s question specifically: the early release scheme that the Lord Chancellor established expressly excludes serious violence and sexual offenders, including rapists. There is an additional safeguard, which did not exist in the previous Labour Government’s equivalent scheme: a governor’s veto of early release if they believe there is a threat to public safety.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith) (Lab)]

I am glad that the Minister has brought the Lord Chancellor and the Prisons Minister with him, as they can explain how 70-day early release—Operation Early Dawn—means that criminals either will not be locked up or are being let out early. Is the truth not that he is presiding over operational failures in policing, the courts and the prison system, and is responding to them with ad hoc panic measures?

[Chris Philp]

The police are successfully reducing crime, for which I thank them. In the last calendar year—the most recent year for which figures are available—there were 30,000 more successful outcomes, which typically means a prosecution, than the previous year. The courts and prisons systems in England and Wales—as in Scotland and around the world—are under pressure, candidly speaking, largely as a result of the post-covid environment and delays that built up in the system during covid, which have not yet cleared. That is not unique to this jurisdiction. Those people released according to the criteria that I mentioned are closely supervised under licence, and subject to recall should they breach that licence.

Assisted Dying

Andy Slaughter Excerpts

Monday 29th April 2024 Westminster Hall

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith) (Lab)]

I could refer Members to Hansard and my speeches in the three previous debates, and then sit down, which might be popular, but looking at those debates I realise that this is something to which some urgency now attaches. The last one was less than two years ago; the previous one, in this Chamber, was three years before that; and four years before that, in 2015, we had the last vote on the issue, when I was in the position of my hon. Friend the Member for Brentford and Isleworth (Ruth Cadbury), replying for the Opposition. I think I am right in saying that the previous vote was about 18 years before that. It is a matter that, partly due to public opinion, demands our attention, and I hope and trust that, certainly after an election, we may be in a position to legislate on it as soon as a year’s time, with the caveat that that will have to be a very serious and profound process.

Public opinion is leading on this. That does not mean that we have to follow public opinion, but there is a substantial change in the mood of the public and overwhelming support for some form of assisted dying, whereas the arguments and opinions have not greatly moved on over the last 10 years. For me, this is about one very simple question: that at the end of my life, it is not just my choice but my right to decide the manner and timing of my leaving it.

I hope first for a huge improvement in palliative care. I took part in the debate on hospice care in the main Chamber last week, and I pointed out that we have not had in-patient beds that are convenient for my constituents for six years. That should not be happening anywhere in the country.

In reality, I do not believe that anybody would say that their religion or their personal views should impact on my choice. The issue is whether there is undue pressure—by the state, the family or the person themselves in considering that act. We have many laws for dealing with coercive behaviour. We should have better palliative care. As a society, we should be able to reassure people that they are all valued as long as they want to be with us, even at the end of life and even, perhaps, in great pain and suffering. That should not be a barrier to those who wish to decide to leave because of great pain, because of great suffering and because the end of their life is near. As a society, we have to grasp that very difficult decision and move on.

Oral Answers to Questions

Andy Slaughter Excerpts

Monday 15th April 2024 Commons Chamber

[James Cleverly]

My hon. Friend makes an important point. Birth rates are driven by myriad social and economic factors, which I have to concede are beyond my control, but I have spoken with my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer about related issues and recognise that GDP per capita is an important metric, as is overall GDP. We are ensuring that we invest in a British workforce: my right hon. Friend the Education Secretary is passionate about apprenticeships and lifelong learning. We want to be a high-skilled, high-income economy, rather than a low-skilled, mass-migration economy. That remains the Government’s priority, and we are taking action through our immigration policy to reflect that desire.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith) (Lab)]

Trhas Teklehaimanot Tesfay is one of the elite female cyclists chosen to lead RideLondon next month. She is also an asylum seeker, living in a hotel in my constituency where the food is so bad it makes her sick and unable to compete. Last month, an investigation by Sustain found food for asylum seekers that was undercooked, past its sell-by date and infested with insects, which in some cases left them malnourished and hospitalised. Could the Secretary of State investigate this scandal and the responsibility of the contractor Clearsprings, so that asylum seekers such as Trhas are not subject to such dangerous and degrading conditions?

[James Cleverly]

Mr Speaker, I can assure you, the hon. Gentleman and the House that our contractors are expected to maintain standards and, where they fall below those standards, they will be held to account. I will absolutely take note of the case that the hon. Gentleman has raised.

Points of Order

Andy Slaughter Excerpts

Tuesday 24th October 2023 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I am grateful to the Minister for clarifying the situation and I trust that that satisfies the shadow Minister’s point of order.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith) (Lab)]

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Yesterday, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care made an official visit to Charing Cross Hospital in my constituency. On arrival, he was joined by the Minister without Portfolio, the right hon. Member for Chelsea and Fulham (Greg Hands) and the Conservative parliamentary candidate for Hammersmith and Chiswick. They then proceeded to use the visit for party political purposes.

A video they recorded inside the hospital concludes by saying that the hospital has

“got a really, really great future here under the Conservatives.”

That will come as a surprise to my constituents who fought for seven years to stop Conservative Governments demolishing the hospital and, earlier this year, saw it taken out of the 2030 new hospital programme, putting £1 billion of essential funding at risk.

Paragraph 8.1 of the ministerial code states:

“Official facilities paid for out of public funds should be used for Government publicity and advertising but may not be used for the dissemination of material which is essentially party political.”

Can you advise me what steps I can take to see that that flagrant breach of the ministerial code is properly investigated?

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his point of order and for having given me notice of his intention to raise it. I am not absolutely clear: is he saying that a Minister visited his constituency but did not give him notice?

[Andy Slaughter]

No, Madam Deputy Speaker, I am saying that the Minister visited and used official facilities for a party political purpose.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I heard that part of what the hon. Gentleman said—[Interruption.] Order. I do not need all that talking while I am dealing with a point of order because it means I cannot hear anything. The hon. Gentleman’s main point is not that he was not notified of the visit but about the content of the visit. If it had been about notification, I could certainly have dealt with that from the Chair. The content of the visit is a matter for the ministerial code and not something I can deal with from the Chair, but I am confident that there are currently some senior Ministers on the Treasury Bench, and I trust that the hon. Gentleman’s point will be taken seriously. If it is a matter for the ministerial code but cannot be dealt with from the Treasury Bench, he ought perhaps to write to the Speaker and the matter can then be discussed in that way.

Crime and Antisocial Behaviour: West London

Andy Slaughter Excerpts

Monday 3rd July 2023 Commons Chamber

[Ruth Cadbury]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The problem with antisocial behaviour is that it is often dealt with as “no crime”. It is true that there are more serious crimes that need to be dealt with, but, for so many, antisocial behaviour feels like the thin end of the wedge.

There is a thread connecting these crimes that impact on all of our constituents, and ASB in particular: the sense that they are allowed to happen in plain sight. There is an assumption that the police are at the core of the solution. In some ways, they are.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith) (Lab)]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for securing the debate. She is describing something familiar to all of us in west London. In the post-covid period, there has been a rapid increase in antisocial behaviour, vehicle crime and drug-related crime. I have an active local authority that has more CCTV cameras per head of population than any other in the country and which has employed 70 law enforcement officers of its own. What is missing is the neighbourhood policing that we used to have that reassured local communities and gathered intelligence. That really did make a contribution to both reassurance and keeping crime down, and that is what we need back.

[Ruth Cadbury]

I agree. We remember the time in the noughties when we had five officers for every ward, but they have been cut to less than half that.

Let me talk about the role of the Metropolitan police. I am grateful for my regular meetings with Chief Superintendent Wilson and other inspectors in Hounslow, and for the fact that Commissioner Mark Rowley has met London MPs frequently, including last week. In Hounslow, I have been on a walkabout both in Osterley and in Isleworth, and in a response car all around my constituency. I have had the chance to see just how well local officers know our community and how hard they work.

However, there is a huge gap between those positive experiences and the wider services provided by the Met, as we know from both the Casey report and the experiences of our constituents. I am well aware of the work that Metropolitan Commissioner Mark Rowley is doing to try to turn around the appalling prejudices of a number of police officers and the generic responses that all victims of crime get, so that people have some confidence in the core service. We look forward to seeing significant progress on that before too long.

Many residents, constituents and businesses have told me that when they have reported crimes, they receive either not a proper response or no response at all. They get a crime reference number—that is it. A crime reference number is not justice served. That is Commissioner Mark Rowley’s task. The lack of response feeds into the sense of powerless and unfairness. People want the police to investigate, catch the criminals and stop crime from reoccurring. Mark Rowley has promised to turn around the ship and restore trust in the Met. That trust needs to be rebuilt urgently.

I want to focus on the Conservative Government, who have overseen the last 13 years of broken promises on policing across England. First, there was the decision to cut 20,000 experienced police officers. In London, more than 2,000 were cut, and in Hounslow borough, 80 experienced officers were cut. They knew their communities and knew the appropriate response to ensure that information was gathered and conflict situations were not escalated. Those experienced officers have, too often, gone.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Minister for Crime, Policing and Fire (Chris Philp)]

I congratulate the hon. Member for Brentford and Isleworth (Ruth Cadbury) on securing the debate. It is particularly well timed, given that this week is Anti-Social Behaviour Awareness Week. In fact, the launch event happened in Parliament earlier this evening, attended by the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, my hon. Friend the Member for Derbyshire Dales (Miss Dines) who is the Minister with responsibility for safeguarding.

We are clearly all extremely concerned about the effect of antisocial behaviour: the effect it has on our communities and the way that it can undermine residents’ feeling of safety in their own neighbourhoods. Whether it is a high street, a local park or a playground, people should be able to feel safe on their own streets and not feel any sense of fear or menace. The hon. Lady is right to say that antisocial behaviour should not be considered a low level or minor thing, because it affects how people feel in their own neighbourhoods. For that reason, it is a very important topic, and I am glad that we have an opportunity to discuss it this evening.

The hon. Lady started by saying that she did not want to talk about figures. However, although the stories are important and we will talk about how people feel, it is also important to have a firm statistical grasp of what is actually happening. As Members will know, the only statistically approved measure of crime in England and Wales is the crime survey, endorsed by the Office for National Statistics, which says that it is the only reliable long-term measure of crime. If we look at the figures since 2010, just to take an arbitrary year, we will see that violence has reduced by 41%, criminal damage by 68% and various forms of theft by about 40%. We have, therefore, seen dramatic reductions in crime, as reported by the crime survey, over the past 13 years, but we should not be complacent, and we clearly need to do a lot more.

One thing that we have in our armoury to fight antisocial behaviour is police officers. The hon. Lady spoke passionately and eloquently about that. It is particularly welcome that we now have a record number of police officers across England and Wales—149,572, to be precise, which is about 3,000 more than we had in March 2010. There are now more than 35,000 officers in London—every Member present is a London MP—which is more officers than it has ever had at any time in its history. That is thanks to the police uplift programme that the Government funded.

[Andy Slaughter]

rose—

[Chris Philp]

I will give way to the hon. Gentleman in a moment. London could have had another 1,000 officers on top of that, funded by the Government, but unfortunately Sadiq Khan was not able to organise himself to hire them, which is a great shame. I am sure that Labour Members, including the hon. Member for Hammersmith (Andy Slaughter), will join me in calling on Sadiq Khan to get his act together and recruit those extra funded officers.

[Andy Slaughter]

I just want to give the Minister a quick reality check. If he is right that crime is massively down, why are my constituents telling me every day that there is a feeling of lawlessness on the streets that they have not experienced before? Offences include drug offences and cars being broken into and stolen. If he has replaced the 20,000 officers that the Government initially got rid of, why, as my hon. Friend the Member for Brentford and Isleworth has said, do my neighbourhood teams have only one or two officers per ward, rather than the six officers that they had before the Conservatives started running them down?

[Chris Philp]

It is not me that is telling the hon. Gentleman that crime has reduced; it is the crime survey of England and Wales, endorsed by the Office for National Statistics. What he is talking about is the perception of crime, which is very important as well. It is important that people feel safe, and that is why we need to do more, but the figures are very clear. If he doubts them, I honestly recommend that he looks at the crime survey statistics, because they actually make for quite comforting reading. The perception of crime is important and there is more to do.

The hon. Gentleman asked about the deployment of neighbourhood officers. How the record number of officers are deployed is an operational matter for the commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, and the police and crime commissioner for London, Mayor Sadiq Khan. The hon. Gentleman’s representations would be well directed to them, but London has never in its history had a greater total number of officers. I agree that having them on neighbourhood deployment is valuable. The hon. Member for Brentford and Isleworth said that an extra 20 officers are part of a newly established town centre team. The same is true of Croydon, which also has about 20 extra officers, and that is very welcome and useful. In addition to officers, we also need bases from which they can patrol. I am sure that Labour Members will join me in calling on the Mayor of London Sadiq Khan to ditch his plan, announced in 2017, to close 37 police stations. I notice that, miraculously and for reasons that I cannot imagine, he has just decided to cancel the closure plan for Uxbridge police station. Let us hope that he cancels the closure plans for the other 36 police stations.

Let me move on to the importance of prevention. We have talked about police stations, officers and the importance of their being deployed in the neighbourhood, but prevention is important, too. The hon. Member for Brentford and Isleworth referred to the Mayor of London’s violence reduction partnership, and in the next breath she said that the Government had been bystanders. What she forgot to mention was that the so-called Mayor of London’s violence reduction partnership is entirely funded by the Government. For some reason, she omitted to mention that. I am glad to say that violence reduction units, or partnerships, have received £170 million of Government funding. They do valuable work in providing diversionary activity. The Youth Endowment Fund, which has £200 million over 10 years, identifies the best kinds of intervention and funds them, as well as cognitive behavioural therapy, which helps many young people.

We have an antisocial behaviour action plan, which was launched by the Prime Minister just a couple of months ago and is being rolled out as we speak. It has a number of elements; I will not detain the House by going through all of them at this late hour, but I will mention a couple. One is hotspot patrolling: antisocial behaviour hotspots are identified, and police officers are “surged” into those areas. Ten police force areas around the country are conducting pilots during the current financial year. I spoke to the police and crime commissioners about it today, and all the pilots will be up and running this month. From next April, every police force in the country—all 43 of the forces in England and Wales—will have hotspot policing, and there will be just over £1 million for each police force to fund the ASB patrols. That will be welcome, and will address some of the issues that the hon. Lady raised.

There will also be 10 immediate justice pilots, again funded with about £1 million for each force, and starting this month. People who take part in antisocial behaviour will very quickly—ideally within 48 hours—have to undertake restorative work such as removing graffiti or cleaning up a park or a high street, wearing branded hi-vis jackets. Once the pilots have been completed this year, every police force in the country, from next April, will have an immediate justice project, again fully funded by the Government with £1 million for each police force—about £43 million in total. We are banning nitrous oxide, which I think will also help on the antisocial behaviour front. I hope Members will agree that the antisocial behaviour action plan, of which those measures are just a small part, will help us to clamp down on ASB in our communities. The total funding for the plan is about £160 million.

In the moments remaining to us, let me commend the safer streets fund. The hon. Lady mentioned CCTV in an alleyway, which may well have ultimately been funded by the fund. London has so far received about £3.2 billion. The fund is designed to fund measures such as CCTV to help people feel safer on the streets, with particular emphasis on women’s safety but with the aim of combating ASB more widely as well. We will shortly announce the next safer streets funding round.

We take vehicle and bicycle theft very seriously—the incidence of both has fallen dramatically, and I think that bicycle theft may have fallen by as much as 65% since 2010—and we also take catalytic converter thefts very seriously. We had a spate of those in Croydon. I was told by our borough commander that a gang had been arrested a few months ago, and since then we have seen a big reduction, certainly in south London, although I am not sure whether the same is true in west London. We experienced a big drop about six months ago, when that gang was arrested. The Scrap Metal Dealers Act 2013—which began as a private Member’s Bill, taken through the House by my constituency predecessor, Sir Richard Ottaway—has helped a great deal. The Bill was originally inspired by thefts of lead from church roofs, but it is also making it harder, although sadly not impossible, to sell the rare earth metals to be found in catalytic converters. We are working on that with the National Vehicle Crime Working Group.

Net Migration Figures

Andy Slaughter Excerpts

Thursday 25th May 2023 Commons Chamber

[Robert Jenrick]

We have made a clear manifesto commitment to see numbers falling sustainably, and this week we are taking action that will have a material impact. As I have said a number of times this morning, net migration is far too high, and I worry that that is placing intolerable pressure on public services, on housing supply and on our ability in this country to integrate new arrivals. Those are the reasons why we need to take action, and if we need to take further steps we will do so.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith) (Lab)]

I think the Minister needs to get his story straight on the asylum backlog. Is he saying that he wants to get it down—in which case he is not doing a very good job, because it is up to 172,000—or is he saying that he is keeping it high, with all the attendant costs and misery, in order to deter fresh claims?

[Robert Jenrick]

I have made it very clear that we want to get the backlog down, but I have also pointed out that Labour’s only policy in respect of illegal migration is to clear the backlog faster. Open borders, faster processing —that is not going to work.

Coronation: Policing of Protests

Andy Slaughter Excerpts

Tuesday 9th May 2023 Commons Chamber

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith) (Lab)]

No one will wish the new commissioner of the Met success more than London MPs, whose constituents have suffered a catalogue of institutional harm under his predecessors, but his statement in the Evening Standard today is political somersaulting from start to finish, including justifying arrests because celebrating crowds “applauded and cheered” them. Is that not a direct result of the undue pressure put on the commissioner by a Conservative party that increasingly picks and chooses when it follows the rule of law?

[Chris Philp]

I do not accept that. I have already pointed out the operational independence of the police and I have said that briefings by the Met on the coronation were received not just by Home Office Ministers, but also by the shadow Home Secretary and the Mayor of London, all of which was completely proper.