Non-Consensual Sexually Explicit Images and Videos (Offences) Bill [HL] Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateBaroness Penn
Main Page: Baroness Penn (Conservative - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Baroness Penn's debates with the Ministry of Justice
(5 days, 12 hours ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I add my congratulations to and admiration of my noble friend Lady Owen on bringing forward her Private Member’s Bill today. As the noble Baroness, Lady Smith, and my noble friend Lord Parkinson have said, she has also demonstrated that diversity in this House, in all its forms, including of age, is of great benefit—and perhaps we should all have declared an interest in congratulating her in that respect.
Given the number of excellent speeches we have had, of which the Government should take note, I will limit myself to three brief points. The first is that the Government really need to change their attitude towards Private Members’ Bills—not just this Government, but the previous Government and many Governments before them. I know, from being a Minister briefed to respond to Private Members’ Bills, that sometimes it goes along the lines of, “We really think it’s an excellent Bill and agree with the points in it, but here are the following reasons you can give as to why it can’t happen”. When I asked, “Well, if we agree with it, could we not solve some of those points and see if we can make it happen?” I was told that that was really not the way things were done. But there is no reason for that.
As my noble friend and the noble Lord, Lord Browne of Ladyton, said, the Government committed to using every tool at their disposal to tackle violence against women and girls. Why not this one? It is entirely possible for Members of Parliament, from both Houses, to identify pressing policy issues and come up with sensible solutions to them. The Government should use Private Members’ Bills as an opportunity to deliver in areas where they would not otherwise get round to legislating—or not fast enough.
That brings me to my second point. I understand that the Government have plans to legislate for the offence—it was in their manifesto—but, if that is the case, as the noble Lord, Lord Browne, said, why not act now? Why not support the Bill? There are tens of thousands of pieces of content being created each week, so time is of the essence. The production of this content is growing exponentially. The noble Lord, Lord Stevenson, tried to help the Minister by saying that drafting issues may need to be addressed—but, as he will know, drafting issues can be addressed in Private Members’ Bills if the Government want to do that.
If the Government do not propose to support the Bill, I ask the Minister not just in which Bill they will legislate but, specifically, when that Bill will be introduced to Parliament and, consequently, when an offence will be brought into force. If he cannot be specific on these points, it makes the decision to oppose the Bill even more troubling.
Finally, my noble friend did an excellent job of ensuring that the measures in the Bill were informed by victims and survivors of this kind of abuse—it is an honour to have some of them here today—and to ensure that it has been future-proofed. I hope that the Minister’s response will address all the specific points raised in the Bill about being consent-based, about the solicitation of images, about forced deletion and about the Bill being future-proofed through the definition of “taking” images and the definition of an “intimate state”.
The most straightforward thing for the Government to do to take action on this important issue would be to support my noble friend’s Bill. Perhaps the Minister will surprise us today by doing so.