(1 week, 1 day ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir John. I congratulate you on your impeccable chairing of Westminster Hall this afternoon.
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes) for securing this debate, and for her powerful and eloquent opening speech. I am grateful to her and to all the other hon. Members who have contributed. The right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) has a long-standing interest in the subject, and she highlighted the important work of the James Brindley Foundation.
My hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Edgbaston (Preet Kaur Gill) referred to the Labour party manifesto commitment in July for a mandatory referral to youth offending teams for young people caught carrying knives, which is very important. The hon. Member for Stratford-on-Avon (Manuela Perteghella) and my hon. Friend the Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger) talked about tragic cases in their constituencies.
The hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan) talked about his personal experience of youth provision and how important that was in his life. My hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton West (Warinder Juss) talked about the coalition to tackle knife crime, which I will say something about in a moment. My hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton North East (Mrs Brackenridge) brought her enormous experience as a former deputy headteacher to the debate.
The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) talked about the horror of knife crime and attacks, particularly on women and girls, and the need to work together throughout all the nations to bring together experience of what works. My hon. Friend the Member for Worcester (Tom Collins) made a compelling speech about young people and putting them at the heart of the response to knife crime. I am grateful for all those contributions.
It has been made clear throughout the debate that knife crime is a source of harm, fear and, in the worst cases, unbearable grief. The debate has focused on the west midlands, but the truth is that this issue affects far too many communities across Britain. The stories that we have heard so powerfully today affect families up and down the nation. We have seen that yet again in recent weeks, with a number of fatal stabbings of young people in different parts of the country. We can only imagine what the loved ones of those who have lost their lives will be going through, and all our thoughts and prayers are with them.
Knife crime has destroyed far too many lives. That is why we described the issue as a “national crisis” in our manifesto, and why, as part of the safer streets mission, which is central to the Government’s plan for change, we aim to halve knife crime within a decade. We have already taken some important steps since the general election. I will touch on those and on further measures we will take as I respond to the points that have been raised.
First, I want to deal with the issue of resources being available to police in the west midlands. For the coming year, the total funding for police forces overall will be up to £17.4 billion—an increase of nearly £1 billion compared with 2024-5. West Midlands police will receive up to £838.4 million in funding in 2025-26—an increase of £48 million compared with the 2024-25 settlement, and 3% more in real terms.
We have talked a lot today about neighbourhood policing and the idea of visible policing being important to our communities. The Government are determined that neighbourhood policing will be rebuilt, and that communities in the west midlands will benefit from our neighbourhood policing guarantee. As constituency MPs, we all know the impact that good neighbourhood policing has on local community confidence and on preventing crime, and that should never be underestimated. Local officers and PCSOs who know their patch are the building blocks of every aspect of policing, be that tackling knife crime, serious or organised crime, or extremist and terror threats. 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 special constables in neighbourhood policing roles.
I also want to refer to violence reduction units, because one of the big challenges in dealing with knife crime is getting all the different agencies together. Violence reduction units have been an essential part of bringing partners together to understand and tackle the drivers of serious violence in their areas, and to deliver a range of early intervention and prevention programmes to support young people away from a life of crime. That includes activity in Coventry and Wolverhampton to support high-risk young people and to connect them with an exit pathway from gangs, violence and county lines. I can confirm that all VRUs have the A&E navigator programmes as part of what they provide locally.
I will move on to the specifics of what the Government have introduced to tackle knife crime. First, we have taken swift action to take dangerous weapons off the streets. We ran a surrender and compensation scheme for zombie-style knives and zombie-style machetes between 26 August ’24 and 23 September ’24. Following that, the ban came into force on 24 September and it is now illegal to sell or own those weapons.
Secondly, we ran a consultation between 13 November ’24 and 11 December ’24, seeking views on the legal description of a ninja sword, to help our plans for an effective ban.
Thirdly, we have commenced a review into the online sales and delivery of knives, led by Commander Stephen Clayman, the national policing lead for knife crime. That will identify gaps in the current processes and legislation and the most effective ways to address them. The review will report to the Home Secretary at the end of January, and I very much hear the need for rapid action when that review is produced.
Fourthly, we have consulted on introducing personal liability measures for senior executives of online platforms or marketplaces who fail to take action to remove illegal content relating to knives and other weapons. The consultation was launched on 13 November and closed on 11 December, and we are analysing the responses.
I pay tribute to the coalition to tackle knife crime. We are clear that we will not succeed in our ambition to halve knife crime in isolation. That means working together with those who share our vision for safer communities. That is why, in September, the Prime Minister launched the coalition to tackle knife crime, bringing together campaign groups, families of those who have tragically lost their lives to knife crime, young people who have been impacted and community leaders—all united in their mission to save lives. We are delighted to have representation from the west midlands, with Pooja Kanda, Lynne Baird and Mark Brindley members of the coalition. I pay tribute to all the families who have campaigned so hard in this space and have had to do so for far too long. Having the lived experience of young people is critical to the coalition. We are keen to ensure that they have a platform to share their views, ideas and solutions to make Britain a safer place for the next generation.
That leads me to the next issue: far 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. To address that head-on, we have committed to the creation of the young futures programme, which will establish a network of young futures hubs and young futures prevention partnerships, to intervene early to ensure that that cohort is identified and offered support, as well as creating more opportunities for young people in their communities through the provision of, for example, open access to mental health, mentoring and careers support. Young futures hubs will bring together the support services that tackle the underlying needs of vulnerable children and young people, making the services more accessible to those who need them. 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.
Let me say a few words about knife-enabled robbery. This is another of my top priorities, and it is incredibly distressing and dangerous for victims. Levels of knife-enabled robbery are unacceptably high and have risen by 11% nationally in the past year. That is why I chair a new taskforce on knife-enabled robbery, bringing together chief constables and other criminal justice partners to take urgent action to tackle it. Working with the College of Policing, the taskforce has used the latest data and evidence to establish what works when tackling this crime. I have asked taskforce chiefs to consider how they will implement those insights in their plans.
Through the taskforce, I have heard directly from West Midlands police about what action they are taking locally to combat knife-enabled robbery. Under the leadership of Chief Constable Craig Guildford, the force has bolstered prevention-focused activities in its hotspots, made improvements to how priority offenders are identified and managed, and taken steps to ensure and enhance the quality of investigations. Recent results are very promising, with considerable reductions in offence levels and increasing numbers of suspects brought to justice.
I also want to refer to serious violence reduction orders in relation to stop and search. West Midlands police is one of the four forces piloting serious violence reduction orders. The two-year pilot, launched in April ’23, is due to finish in April this year. Those court orders can be placed on adults upon conviction of a knife or offensive weapons offence. They provide the police with the power to automatically stop and search individuals convicted of knife offences, with the aim of deterring habitual knife-carrying behaviour.
Stop and search is an important tool, but it must be used fairly and effectively. In the 12 months to March ’24, 1,293 offensive weapons and firearms were found by police through stop and search in the west midlands. However, as we know, the tactic often disproportionately affects ethnic minority communities, so it needs to be deployed in a targeted way and with sensitivity. Although the Government welcome reductions in the ethnic disparity and disproportionality of stop and search in recent years, there is more work to do. In the west midlands, black people are still 2.7 times more likely to be stopped and searched than white people.
Another issue that we need to talk about, and which several hon. Members raised, is county lines. To achieve our goal of halving knife crime in a decade, it is essential that we tackle the drugs gangs that drive violence and exploit children into criminality. That is why our manifesto included a commitment to introduce a new offence of child criminal exploitation. County lines is the most violent model of drug supply and a harmful form of child criminal exploitation. The west midlands is one of four urban regions in which we are funding a dedicated task force to close lines, prosecute violent offenders and safeguard vulnerable people. Last month, West Midlands police took part in the national week of intensification targeting county lines gangs, and it achieved excellent results, making over 80 arrests, safeguarding more than 90 children and 20 vulnerable adults, and taking dozens of dangerous bladed weapons off our streets.
I repeat my earlier thanks to my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich and all who have participated in this debate. Whatever side of the House we sit on, and whatever our constituency, this issue matters deeply to us and the people that we represent. We all have a responsibility to do everything in our power to tackle the scourge of knife crime.
(1 week, 5 days ago)
Commons ChamberI feel quite intoxicated by the number of local licensed premises that have been mentioned this morning. It must have set some sort of record. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Wrexham (Andrew Ranger) on his success in the ballot for private Members’ Bills—in the 20 years I have been a Member I have never had any success in it. I also congratulate him on his decision to pick this worthwhile topic as the subject for his Bill and I recognise his long career in the hospitality sector, as well as his clear expertise in the area. I am also incredibly impressed by the detailed knowledge Members have of licensed premises in their constituencies. I note the mention of the all-party parliamentary group on beer, which is obviously an important group and has a large and thriving membership.
I am grateful for the contributions of other hon. Members to the debate. I note the contributions from the right hon. Member for Basildon and Billericay (Mr Holden), who I think it is fair to say has a great deal of experience in pubs, and from my hon. Friend the Member for Clwyd North (Gill German) who talked about the Welsh perspective. I admire the determination of my hon. Friend the Member for Bangor Aberconwy (Claire Hughes) to visit all her local pubs. I enjoyed hearing about the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Northampton South (Mike Reader) being the home of certain breweries. My hon. Friend the Member for Barking (Nesil Caliskan) reminded us of the importance of the Bill’s proposals to restaurants, cafes and the high street, talking about the 65 hospitality sites in her constituency and the 1,000 people employed by them.
I am pleased to say that there has been a high degree of consensus on this measure, and I can say from the outset that the Government support the Bill and will do what we can to facilitate its passage here and in the other place. I also pay tribute to the work of my hon. Friend the Member for South Shields (Mrs Lewell-Buck) who led on this issue in the last Parliament, and managed to get her Bill through this place, although the general election intervened, unfortunately, before it could make its way on to the statute books.
My hon. Friend the Member for Wrexham, in his excellent speech, set out a compelling case for the Bill. Section 172 of the Licensing Act 2003 already makes provision for the Secretary of State to make an order that relaxes licensing hours in England and Wales for
“an occasion of exceptional international, national, or local significance”.
In practice, the Home Secretary determines whether an occasion meets those criteria on a case-by-case basis, and orders must specify the dates and times of the relaxations.
First, such orders bring about benefits to businesses, which can stay open for longer and thus increase revenue. Secondly, communities also benefit, as they are able to come together to celebrate important events. Thirdly, orders benefit licensing authorities, which do not have to process large numbers of licence extensions individually, often in a very limited time period.
Of course, it is for businesses to decide whether they wish to take advantage of extensions, but if they do wish to stay open, a blanket licensing extension automatically means that they do not have to give a temporary event notice to their local authority, which saves them time as well as the associated fee.
As a former licensing board member, I welcome this Bill. Pubs in Falkirk would certainly have benefited from extensions during the Euro 2020 and Euro 2024 finals, as well as for the world cup final in 2023, and I declare an interest as a member of the tartan army. We need to recognise the impact that extensions have on hospitality workers in the Bill. Would the Minister endorse Unite’s “Get Me Home Safely” campaign and encourage businesses who are going to benefit from this extension to make sure that their staff get home safely?
Absolutely. My hon. Friend makes an important point about ensuring that those who work in hospitality are well protected and that getting them home is an important part of employers’ duty to keep their workforce safe. In the past, licensing hours have been relaxed for high-profile royal events, such as His Majesty the King’s coronation, Her Late Majesty the Queen’s 90th birthday and her platinum jubilee, as well as the royal weddings in 2018 and 2011. Licensing hours have also been extended for sporting events, including the FIFA world cup 2014, the Euro 2020 final and the Euro 2024 semi-final and final. When the Government have proposed extensions to licensing hours, they have received cross-party support in both Houses and have been passed unopposed.
As we have heard, the Licensing Act specifies that any order is subject to the affirmative procedure and needs to be approved by both Houses of Parliament before it comes into force. The Bill proposes to amend the Licensing Act so that these orders are subject to the negative resolution procedure, rather than the affirmative procedure. That will enable extensions to be implemented at short notice if necessary, including when Parliament is in recess. The current arrangements means that fast-paced extensions are simply not always possible. That is problematic in the context of sporting events, as the participation of national teams in the later stages of competitions is uncertain until the last moment.
I will provide an example to illustrate that. In 2021, the England men’s team made it through to the final of the delayed Euro 2020 tournament. With the help of the usual channels, the previous Government managed to push an order through Parliament in the three days between the semi-final and the final. To emphasise my earlier point, I note there was complete agreement across the House for the measure. In the summer of 2023, the England women’s team equally commendably reached the final of the world cup. However, that tournament took place in the summer when Parliament was in recess, so it was sadly not possible to extend licensing hours for the match. The Bill will rectify this issue and ensure that licensing hours can be extended at short notice when necessary, including when Parliament is in recess.
Does the Minister not share my concern that this is a Bill of very limited ambition? Considering what she has said, surely there is a strong case for deregulating this whole area and for getting Parliament and the Government out of hospitality businesses’ hair.
The measures before us are simple and straightforward, and the debate shows there is widespread agreement in the House about them. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will, in this case, not cause any problems to the Bill going forward.
The Bill will rectify the issues we have been discussing and streamline the parliamentary process, but it does not seek to alter the fundamental content of the Licensing Act 2003. However, the Government fully intend to plan ahead, so that wherever possible licensing hour extension orders in England and Wales can be brought in with time for full public consultation. The power in section 172 of the Licensing Act has, rightly, been used sparingly, and there is no intention to change the frequency with which the relevant powers are invoked.
As the Minister for Policing, Fire and Crime Prevention, it is important that I make clear that the police have generally been supportive of extensions for royal events, and that there have been no major increases in crime and disorder attributable to temporary extended drinking hours. However, the police have previously expressed some concerns about licensing extensions relating to sporting events, namely football. It is therefore of the utmost importance that the police have the opportunity to put forward their views, and we will always give due weight to any concerns raised before pressing ahead with an extension of licensing hours.
The Government recognise the importance of providing the police with ample time to put in place additional policing measures that may be necessary to minimise any potential increase in crime and disorder as a result of any temporary licensing hours extension. To that end, the Government remain firmly committed to continuing to plan in advance, wherever possible.
In conclusion, I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Wrexham for bringing forward the legislation and those who have spoken in support of it. It is a simple measure that will free up parliamentary time, help the Government to continue to support businesses and local authorities, and allow for celebrations of important events in the life of the nation. The Government fully support the Bill, and it is very important to get it passed before last orders.
(2 weeks ago)
Written StatementsThe Government are today laying a statutory instrument before Parliament that will increase firearms licensing fees to provide full-cost recovery for police forces, giving effect to a commitment in the Government’s manifesto.
The fees for firearms licensing applications administered by police forces were last increased in 2015 and they no longer meet the cost of the service provided. It is essential for both public safety and police efficiency that full-cost recovery fees are introduced so that service improvements can be made. The need to increase fees to help address shortcomings in firearms licensing was highlighted as essential for public safety by the Senior Coroner in his preventing future deaths reports into the fatal shootings in Plymouth in August 2021.
As well as supporting public safety, the increased fees will support police forces to provide an improved service to firearms applicants, through better resourced and trained licensing teams.
The Home Office will conduct more regular reviews of firearms licensing fees in the future, to ensure they keep pace with police costs.
The Government’s manifesto commitment refers to the money raised by full-cost recovery fees being used to support youth interventions to prevent serious violence. However, we have decided instead that firearms fees income must be retained by police forces to support improvements in police firearms licensing. Delivering the youth interventions element of the manifesto commitment remains a priority and will be funded by the Home Office.
[HCWS366]
(2 weeks, 2 days ago)
Commons ChamberWe all understand the devastating harm that crime can cause in rural communities. The Government are committed to taking action, which is why we will be enacting the Equipment Theft (Prevention) Act 2023 to tackle the theft of agricultural machinery and equipment. We will strengthen enforcement on fly-tipping and antisocial behaviour, and we will deliver more rural patrols through our neighbourhood policing guarantee.
I thank the Minister for her answer. She will know that the funding allocations for policing are based on reported crime, not underlying crime rates. In rural areas such as North Shropshire, people say that they do not always report a crime when it happens. Residents in Oswestry and Whitchurch tell me that they do not bother to phone the police because they do not think anyone will come. Will she consider reassessing the formula to ensure that in rural areas the funding reflects the level of underlying crime?
I reassure the hon. Lady that funding for the year 2025-26 for her police force will be £316.3 million, an increase of £80 million on the figures from this year. I encourage all people who are victims of crime to report it. We need that information so that the police can then make the required resources available.
In my constituency, fly-tipping on farms and private land and the targeted theft of heating oil are causing profound problems for families and businesses alike. Will the Minister update me on progress to tackle rural crime, and will the Home Office consider setting up a rural taskforce, working across Departments, to tackle these issues?
I absolutely share my hon. Friend’s concerns about the extent of rural crime, particularly fly-tipping. Recent research shows that 80% of farmers say they are affected by fly-tipping. I am particularly concerned about the targeted theft of heating oil from families and businesses at this time of year. As I said, we will be strengthening neighbourhood policing and we will see more patrols in rural areas, which will help. We will also have forthcoming legislation to provide the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs with the powers it needs to support local authorities in exercising new fly-tipping enforcement powers.
Will the Minister meet me to discuss the effect that rural crime, particularly hare coursing and, as we have heard today, theft from farms and sheds, has on residents in Ely and East Cambridgeshire?
I am always very happy to meet hon. Members. The national wildlife crime unit has been doing some very good work, including overseeing the national police response to hare coursing and Operation Galileo, which has resulted in a 40% reduction in offences in that area, but I am very happy to meet the hon. Lady.
Right across the towns and villages I represent, people have seen, as the rural policing presence has declined, predictable increases in shoplifting, antisocial behaviour, farm break-ins and fly-tipping. We cannot allow that to be tolerated. What steps will the Minister take to ensure that my local police have the resources and powers they need to take those crimes seriously?
The neighbourhood policing guarantee applies not just to towns and cities, of course, but to rural communities, so we will see a far greater police presence out and about in those communities. The Home Office is currently working with the National Police Chiefs’ Council on a rural and wildlife crime strategy, to crack down on some of the crime and disorder that has worsened in recent years.
Burglary is a particularly invasive crime that has a profound impact on the security of individuals—as I know from personal experience—as well as on the wider community. For too long a culture has been allowed to develop whereby victims of burglary and other crimes fear that even if they report what has happened, no one will come and nothing will be done. That is the culture we are determined to tackle through our safer streets mission and our commitment to neighbourhood policing.
In my local authority area, 92% of burglaries went unsolved, with police failing to identify suspects—that is the worst figure for any community in the country—and in Surrey as a whole, 63% of burglaries were not even attended by police. This has contributed to a decline in confidence in local policing among my constituents. How, specifically, will the Government’s new police performance unit and their neighbourhood policing guarantee ensure that my constituents can feel safe in their homes, and will the Minister join my party in committing to a statutory burglary response guarantee to ensure that all domestic burglaries are attended by a police officer?
The police have made a commitment in England and Wales to attend the scene of every home burglary, so I am concerned by what the hon. Lady has said about her local force. The College of Policing has set out good practice for the investigation of burglaries, which should be followed by police forces, and which sets standards for what should be expected as well as explaining how best to deal with victims. I am mindful of what she has said today and will write to her with details of what more can be done.
We are strengthening how we tackle crime throughout the country, including in Newcastle-under-Lyme. Our safer streets mission aims to halve knife crime and violence against women and girls and to restore confidence in the criminal justice system. The Young Futures programme will divert young people from a life of crime and the neighbourhood policing guarantee will deliver an additional 13,000 neighbourhood policing roles.
Can I say how excellent it is to see the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips), in her place on the Front Bench? I have heard concerns from many constituents in recent days about the grooming of young people, particularly young women, and those are concerns that all of us in this House clearly share. Given that only 6.9% of violent or sexual crimes in the west midlands were solved in the year ending June 2024, what steps are being taken to hold the thugs to account and to protect young people, particularly young women and girls in Newcastle-under-Lyme, so that they can live their lives safely?
I echo my hon. Friend’s comments about my hon. Friend the Safeguarding Minister. On the point he raises, there is an interesting article in the papers today where the Minister is quoted as saying:
“It is completely unacceptable that fewer and fewer violent and sexual crimes are being solved, with more victims being let down time and time again.”
I cannot think of a better champion to take forward the work to protect young women in particular than the Safeguarding Minister.
There will be wizardry in the way this question from Sir Julian is delivered.
Thank you, Mr Speaker. Does the Minister accept that it would greatly assist the police to investigate crime in Newcastle-under-Lyme, and indeed elsewhere, if they were not spending an estimated 60,000 hours investigating and recording so-called non-crime hate incidents?
The Prime Minister, the Home Secretary and I, as the Policing Minister, have said that we want a common-sense approach to dealing with these matters. The Government have been very clear on this. We have set out our priorities as the incoming Government: halving knife crime; halving violence against women and girls; restoring confidence in the justice system; and—one of the big issues for me—tackling antisocial behaviour through our neighbourhood policing guarantee.
The Government are committed to tackling antisocial behaviour and the harm and misery that we all know it causes in communities. This is part of our safer streets mission that will introduce respect orders and put 13,000 additional police officers, PCSOs and special constables into neighbourhood policing roles so that each community has a visible presence and an accountable police team.
Last year, on average, at least three instances of antisocial behaviour per day were reported to Kent police in the city centre of Canterbury alone. We have great beat officers who I know keep our city as safe as they can, but given that the economy of our historic UNESCO city relies so heavily on tourism, how will the Government work with Kent police to further tackle this issue so that residents, businesses and visitors feel safer?
The hon. Lady makes an important point about how antisocial behaviour has to be tackled, particularly in areas where we have lots of tourists. The neighbourhood policing guarantee is important because it will deliver an additional 13,000 police officers, PCSOs and specials in our town and city centres and in rural areas by the end of this Parliament. In the provisional policing settlement, announced just before Christmas, there is £100 million to start the recruitment of the 13,000 police officers.
How will the Minister ensure that the safer streets mission is delivered in communities like mine in Southwark, where too often officers are extracted to police protests and the Met is divided between its neighbourhood and national policing roles?
My hon. Friend makes an important point about the conflicting and competing interests in the Metropolitan police. We have committed to putting police back on the beat through the neighbourhood policing guarantee. A neighbourhood policing team will be in every area. It will be out policing, with intelligence-led, visible patrols, and will ensure officers are protected from being deployed elsewhere. That is part of the guarantee.
Of course, the hon. Gentleman’s force area is getting more money in the settlement that was announced just before Christmas. Clearly, we keep all formulas under consideration and, as the hon. Gentleman knows, we are going to go through a police reform package and programme. Finance will be part of that.
Penselwood in Glastonbury and Somerton is regularly blighted by unlicensed music events, leaving residents feeling frightened and vulnerable, as organisers pay scant regard to them or to the police. How will the Minister support the police to give the public confidence that they will crack down on these illegal raves?
If the hon. Lady writes to me with details, I will certainly look into that issue.
Recently, the owner of social media site X has used his sizeable platform to undermine the democratic result of last July’s general election; has stirred up hatred towards my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips), putting her safety at risk; and has sought mechanisms to depose the Prime Minister. Can the Minister say what actions the Defending Democracy Taskforce is taking to prevent this kind of foreign interference in British politics?
Several of my constituents in South Oxhey have unfortunately been the victims of burglary or attempted burglary. Will the Home Secretary outline the measures her Department is taking to allow the police to invest in technologies such as live facial recognition, which can make crimes such as burglary easier to solve?
We are currently looking into whether there is a need for more regulation of live facial recognition, but I recognise that it is a very important tool to which the police should have access. I am having a series of stakeholder meetings with various groups to discuss how we take this forward, but I do recognise how important the technology is and how it can be a really positive way of identifying people and solving crimes.
Can I place on the record my thanks to the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips), who I know will ensure that this Government do more to tackle violence against women and girls than any other Government? In doing so, will the Government amend the strategy to consider prostitution and other forms of commercial sexual exploitation as violence against women and girls?
(3 weeks, 2 days ago)
Commons ChamberLet me begin by wishing everyone a very happy new year, especially you, Madam Deputy Speaker, as well as the hon. Member for Huntingdon (Ben Obese-Jecty), who secured this important debate, and all the Cambridgeshire MPs present in the Chamber. I must also wish a happy new year to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), who is starting the year as he finished the last one: by contributing to every Adjournment debate held in this place.
I thank all the police, police staff, police community support officers and specials who were on duty over Christmas and the new year, keeping us all safe. I had the privilege to see that at first hand in Birmingham city centre, when I accompanied West Midlands police, and also in Bedford with Bedfordshire police, just before the Christmas recess.
Quite understandably, the hon. Member for Huntingdon is focused on police funding for his constituency and his police force, and I will shortly come to the specific questions on Cambridgeshire constabulary. However, I will start by referring to the provisional police funding settlement for England and Wales, which was laid before the House just before the Christmas recess.
The headline is that overall funding for policing will rise to £19.5 billion in 2025-26. That is an increase of up to £1 billion from this financial year, and we are investing in key areas. We have listened to what the police have to say about the challenges they face, and we have secured a settlement that seeks to address those concerns and provide the building blocks for our programme of reform. Included in that figure is £100 million to kick-start our commitment to neighbourhood policing and put officers back into the heart of communities. We are also covering the cost to the police of the changes to employers’ national insurance contributions and the police pay awards.
Turning to the points raised in the debate, and particularly to funding for Cambridgeshire constabulary, I remind the House that it is for police and crime commissioners to set the annual budget for their police force area, including the level of the police precept. It is for the operationally independent chief constable to decide how to use the resources to meet the police and crime commissioner’s priorities. Having said that, funding for Cambridgeshire will rise by up to £11.1 million in the next financial year. This is a cash increase of up to 5.6% compared to the current year, and it is a 3.1% real-terms increase. On funding for employers’ national insurance contributions, I confirm again that the distribution will not be based on the funding formula shares. I hope that provides some reassurance to the force.
We understand that comparing funding between forces will result in highs and lows. I commend Cambridgeshire’s leadership in running an efficient force that has maintained officer numbers and worked to keep the community safe in a very challenging financial environment. The financial shocks of recent years, as well as the position that we inherited from the previous Government, have meant taking some tough choices, but we believe that we have secured a balanced settlement for policing while still driving forward with our key commitments.
In return, we have been very clear that we expect police forces to look for ambitious ways to drive efficiency and productivity and to make real improvements. We are supporting this through our recently announced commercial efficiencies and collaboration programme, which will have its early focus on procurement frameworks and working to use the full advantage of police buying power, alongside the potential for greater cost recovery. December’s announcement was the provisional police settlement, which is now open to consultation until 10 January, and Cambridgeshire constabulary has the opportunity to make further representations during this period.
On the concerns raised by the hon. Member for Huntingdon about the funding formula, I note that population change can vary across the country. I note what he said, and I recognise that forces that have seen bigger changes will be keen to ensure that the funding that they receive keeps pace with demand. In the provisional police settlement, we have delivered a real-terms increase in funding for Cambridgeshire constabulary for next year.
I will just finish this point, as it is perhaps pertinent, given who wishes to intervene. The £1 billion overall increase in the police settlement next year comes at a time when the Government are having to make tough decisions on budgets after inheriting a £22 billion black hole. We are working to fix the economy.
The Minister is making a separate point; my hon. Friend the Member for Huntingdon (Ben Obese-Jecty) was talking about the share of the existing pie—the proportion that Cambridgeshire gets—not about whether more funding is being put in. I wanted to pick up on her interesting point about the consultation being open until 10 January, which is not very far away. What criteria will she apply, when it comes to making adjustments to that provisional allocation? Are those criteria published? A lot of hon. Members may not be sighted on the changes that may be made to the allocation, or on how the Government will reach that decision.
The right hon. Gentleman is an experienced Member of the House, so he will know that this is the normal process. The provisional settlement is announced before Christmas, and then there is an opportunity for police forces to make further representations or to query figures. That has always been the case; there is nothing new about the process that we are using. However, as I said, it is important to note that we are having to make difficult decisions because of the inheritance we have.
Government grants are not the only source of income available to police forces. In 2025-26, PCCs in England have the flexibility to increase the precept by up to £14 for a band D equivalent property, or to go further, should they wish, by holding a local referendum. I note that the Cambridgeshire PCC has chosen to maximise precept in previous years, and subject to the decision for 2025-26, 44% of Cambridgeshire police’s settlement funding will be raised locally via the police precept.
I know the hon. Member for Huntingdon is concerned about the additional demand that a population increase may create for Cambridgeshire police, but I ask him to consider the positive impact that such an increase may have on the council tax base and, as a result, the income that will be generated locally by the PCC. In response to his question about reviewing the funding formula, and on the delivery of this Government’s safer streets mission, we have been clear that broader policing reform is necessary to address the challenges faced by policing, and to help the system deliver effective and efficient policing to the public.
I note the contributions that have been made about the changing face of crime in this country, and the challenges that police forces face. That is why we have clearly set out a reform agenda. The allocation of funding to police forces remains an important consideration in that reform work. Phase 2 of the spending review will give us an opportunity to consider police funding in the medium term, ensuring that it aligns with our programme of reform and delivery of the safer streets mission.
I really welcome the increase in police funding for Cambridgeshire. I understand the concerns being raised. A lot of growth is happening in and around Cambridgeshire. Can the Minister reassure me that her Department will have the relevant conversations with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government and others, to ensure that we show residents how we are supporting police growth as the population expands?
I am happy to give my hon. Friend that assurance.
I will quickly address the issue of neighbourhood policing. I am sure that we can all agree that public confidence in policing is always better when the police are visible, and when there are officers in the heart of communities, building real relationships with the people they serve. There are many ways for the public to contact the police, but we hear consistently that the public value a local, visible policing presence. That is why we are committed to rebuilding neighbourhood policing after it was decimated over the previous 14 years. A named, contactable police officer for every community will be a key part of the neighbourhood policing guarantee. We will set out exactly what the public can expect from their neighbourhood policing teams. As I said, we have kick-started our commitment with £100 million of funding next year to start the work of putting 13,000 police back in our communities.
I congratulate the hon. Member for Huntingdon again on securing the debate, and all Members who contributed to it. Whether we look at this through a national or local lens, policing resourcing matters. It matters to the brave and hard-working officers and staff who work every day to keep the rest of us safe, and to the communities they serve, whether in Cambridgeshire, with its rural and urban areas, or anywhere else. That is why we set out in the provisional funding settlement our intention to make a very substantial investment in policing, and it is why we are working closely with forces to equip them for the challenges that they face, and to deliver our safer streets mission. We are already making progress, and will drive it further with our investment in neighbourhood policing in this settlement.
Question put and agreed to.
(1 month, 1 week ago)
Written StatementsMy right hon. Friend the Home Secretary (Yvette Cooper) has today published the Provisional Police Grant Report (England and Wales) 2025-26. A copy of the provisional report will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses and will be available on www.gov.uk. This provisional report sets out the Home Secretary’s determination for 2025-26 of the aggregate amounts of grants that she proposes to pay under section 46(2) of the Police Act 1996. The final report will be laid before the House in the new year following the period of consultation.
Today, the Government have set out the provisional police funding settlement in Parliament for the forthcoming financial year. I am pleased to announce that, for 2025-26, funding to police forces will total up to £17.4 billion, an increase of up to £986.9 million when compared to the 2024-25 police funding settlement—a significant increase, and more than the increase set out for 2024-25. This settlement represents a real terms increase in force funding of 3.5%, and a cash increase of 6%. The additional funding confirmed through this settlement will cover the costs of the police officer pay awards and fund the recruitment and redeployment of more neighbourhood police and PSCOs.
Overall funding for the policing system in England and Wales, including to police forces and wider system funding, will be up to £19.5 billion, an increase of up to £1 billion when compared to the 2024-25 funding settlement, representing a real terms funding increase of 3% and a cash increase of 5.5%. The investments announced today are in additional to the provision of one-off funding of £175 million we announced in July to support the costs of the 24-25 pay award. Taken together, this significant investment reflect this Government’s commitment to restoring confidence in policing and boosting neighbourhood policing, by providing them with the resources they need to invest in their frontline workforce.
Of the £986.9 million of additional funding for police forces, I can confirm that £657.1 million of this is an increase to Government grants, which includes an increase in the core grants of £339 million to ensure police forces are fully equipped to deliver our Safer Streets mission. This also includes £230.3 million to compensate territorial forces for the costs of the change to the employer national insurance contributions from 2025-26, and an additional £100 million to kick-start the first phase of 13,000 additional police officers, PCSOs and special constables into neighbourhood policing roles. This will provide policing with the funding required to tackle crime and keep communities safe.
As set out in the Local Government policy statement of 28 November, PCCs will have the flexibility to raise the police precept to £14 for a Band D property in 2025-26. This could generate up to £329.8 million of additional funding available to police forces compared with 2024-25. This strikes the balance between protecting taxpayers and providing funding for police forces.
We recognise that the Metropolitan Police Service faces increased demands on resources from policing the capital city. Despite this, the National and International Capital City grant has not increased in line with inflation for at least five years and there has been a substantial increase in protest activity in London in recent years. Therefore, as part of the 2025-26 police funding settlement, the Metropolitan Police and City of London Police forces will receive £255.2 million through the National and International Capital City grant; an increase of £65 million when compared to the 2024-25 settlement, equating to a 34.2% cash increase and 31.1% real terms increase.
Attached are accompanying tables that outline how we propose to allocate this funding settlement across various funding streams and local policing bodies for 2025-26.
Today, this Government have confirmed significant increase in funding for police forces. In return, we expect police forces to raise their ambition on efficiencies and drive forward improvements to productivity while helping us deliver on our mission to create safer streets. To enable this, we have launched the Commercial Efficiencies and Collaboration Programme which will initially focus on national buying and frameworks and cost recovery. We are determined to work with policing to maximise the potential of productivity and innovation, ensuring officers are equipped with the tools they need to keep our communities safe and to deliver our mission.
We expect policing to approach the 2025-26 financial year with a focus on delivering the Government’s priorities, as set out in the Prime Minister’s Plan for Change:
Increasing the number of officers, PCSOs and special constables in neighbourhood policing teams;
Tackling violence against women and girls;
Reducing knife crime;
Cracking down on antisocial behaviour;
And by doing these things, increasing public confidence in policing.
In 2025-26, we will be allocating £376.8 million to support forces to maintain officer numbers.
This Government are committed to increasing policing visibility to protect our communities and restore confidence in policing. To support delivery of our Safer Streets mission, our priority is to increase neighbourhood policing roles.
We are grateful to those forces who have gone above and beyond in recruiting additional officers to maximise the strength of their workforce. We expect that these forces prioritise maintaining these officer numbers and have provided funding to achieve this.
Police forces will still be expected to meet officer number targets in return for funding. However, the Home Office has listened to feedback from forces on the need for increased flexibility to help forces manage their finances. We have therefore rebalanced the funding available in core grant and the ringfence for the purpose of maintaining officers for 2025-26.
As well as investing in maintaining police officers, this Government are committed to going further. As part of our pledge to increase policing visibility, improve public perceptions of the police, and create safer streets for our communities, we are providing a £100 million investment for neighbourhood policing. This will fund the recruitment of additional and redeployed neighbourhood police officers, PCSOs and special constables in 25-26. This will form part of a multi-year programme, and kick-start the delivery in 2025-26 of these additional neighbourhood personnel over the course of this Parliament.
The increase in neighbourhood policing will be done in a way that prioritises forces’ operational flexibility. Forces will be allocated funding and propose a planned workforce increase and mix that works best for the communities that they serve. This funding will help forces deliver our neighbourhood policing guarantee, including the restoration of patrols to town centres giving every community a named officer to turn to, and introducing stronger tools for police to tackle persistent antisocial behaviour.
It is essential that we maximise the value of any new investment within policing. We are driving work to reduce inefficiencies and maximise productivity, freeing cashable savings and officer time to reinvest in frontline activities. We will require forces to participate in the recently announced commercial efficiencies and collaboration programme, starting by forces signing up to national approaches to buying energy, vehicles, fuel, temporary staff and software licences. We will work with policing to develop this programme, to unlock immediate cost savings and laying the foundations to deliver hundreds of millions of pounds of efficiency savings by the end of this Parliament.
The programme will initially target several priority areas. These include:
Fleet—Require better use of existing frameworks and working with policing to standardise requirements enabling better value and reducing full life costs.
Energy—working with the sector to ensure policing can harness wider purchasing power across Government and wider public sector.
ICT—ending the variation in prices for software contracts and then moving to smarter purchasing in other areas of technology.
We will build on the foundations of the policing productivity review to tackle bureaucracy, free up officer time for redeployment on to the frontline and improve outcomes. Such as working to eliminate any wasteful and unnecessary redaction of files passing between the police and the CPS or supporting the roll-out of enhanced and rapid video responses to improve response times and victim outcomes.
The review also highlighted that embedding productivity into the culture of policing can ensure that improvements are made to unlock non-cashable and cashable savings. The effective roll out of this technology is vital to achieve these benefits, and we will work closely with the College of Policing to provide implementation and business change support for forces to implement promising and proven technologies, provide a blueprint for measuring those benefits and demonstrate how to best reinvest time saved into delivery of the neighbourhood policing guarantee.
Firearms licensing fees have not increased since 2015 and are now significantly less than the cost of the service provided by police forces. This funding deficit is impacting the effectiveness of police firearms licensing controls and the crucial role they play in safeguarding the public. We therefore intend to lay a statutory instrument when parliamentary time allows to increase firearms licensing fees to provide full-cost recovery for police forces, in line with our manifesto commitment. The additional revenue raised will be retained by police forces to support the important improvements needed in firearms licensing.
In a written ministerial statement on 19 November, HCWS232, the Home Secretary set out some of the core components of our long-term plans for necessary and overdue police reforms. This will be a joint programme of work between Government and policing in recognition that the challenge of rebuilding confidence is a shared one, and we will work closely with policing over the coming months to develop the detail of the proposals. Working closely, and in partnership with, policing, we will publish a police reform White Paper in the spring, outlining our plans for bold and comprehensive reforms to the policing system. The funding set out today reflects Government’s investment in policing and commitment to ensuring forces have adequate resources to protect the public.
To drive excellence across policing, we will consult with police system leaders on plans for a new national centre of policing. While work is under way to determine the scope and scale of the unit, it is expected to include specialist and supportive functions like forensics, aviation and IT, which have become fragmented and underpowered over the last decade. National arrangements on procurement will also generate savings to reinvest into frontline policing.
To drive up performance and standards and ensure communities can have confidence in their local police force, a new performance unit will be established in the Home Office. The unit will harness national data to monitor performance and direct improvements, underpinned by a performance framework developed with the College of Policing, policing inspectorate, National Police Chiefs’ Council and PCCs.
This Government recognise that police forces must have the right systems, capabilities, and support in place to support us on meeting our mission. This settlement includes £914.3 million for the wider policing system, which:
Maintains the police settlement’s investment in tackling serious violence and county lines next year, ensuring the continuation of violence reduction units and supporting all forces in their ongoing work to close county lines.
Ensures the continuation of major law enforcement programmes which will modernise national mission-critical systems, without which policing cannot operate effectively, tackle a range of threats and make our streets safer.
Supports police efficiency and collaboration by investing in national policing capabilities. This funding establishes the new commercial efficiency and collaboration programme, maintains the digital routes through which members of the public can contact the police, and supports the implementation of digital evidence sharing across the criminal justice system.
Supports law enforcement in tackling serious and organised crime by investing in regional organised crime units, ensuring they are supported in tackling some of the highest harm threats.
This does not represent the Government’s total investment in the policing system and law enforcement. In 2025-26, funding for areas including arm’s length bodies, cyber-crime, forensics, fraud, police productivity and innovation, and tackling exploitation and abuse—including violence against women and girls—will be decided as part of the Home Office’s wider budget allocation process, with funding arrangements for specific programmes confirmed in due course.
Ensuring national security is the first duty of any Government. This Government will provide essential support for Counter Terrorism Policing, ensuring that they have the resources they need to deal with the threats we face. Funding for Counter Terrorism Policing will increase by £140 million to £1.2 billion, which includes funding to compensate for the cost of the employer national insurance contribution changes. PCCs will be notified separately of force-level funding allocations for CT policing, which will not be made public for security reasons.
The provisional funding allocations set out in today’s report reflect this Government’s commitment to working with policing and giving it the resources required to bridge the gap between policing and our communities. This is critical for restoring the public sense of safety on our streets.
We understand that funding certainty is crucial for effective financial planning across police forces. Funding for future years will be agreed in phase 2 of the forthcoming spending review. Police reform proposals will be developed alongside this.
Finally, I must use this opportunity to pay tribute to and thank our committed officers and police staff for the remarkable dedication, courage and resilience they show every day to keep this country safe. This investment today is an investment in these brave men and women. We look forward to working with officers and police staff across the country on our shared ambition to make our streets safer.
Attachments can be viewed online at:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-statement/Commons/2024-12-17/HCWS325/
[HCWS325]
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Written StatementsI am today publishing the Government’s response to the emergency evacuation information sharing plus consultation, which provides further detail of our new residential personal emergency evacuation plan policy.
This policy, which was previously announced in a written ministerial statement on 2 September 2024 HCWS62, which can be viewed at : https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2024-09-02/hcws62 introduces new measures to improve the fire safety for vulnerable residents in high-rise and higher-risk residential blocks of flats, and represents a milestone in addressing the recommendations of the Grenfell Tower inquiry, a key priority for this Government.
Following publication of this Government response, subject to parliamentary approval, we will move to lay regulations to implement the new policy.
A copy of the Government response will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses and it will also be published on gov.uk.
[HCWS271]
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Written StatementsI am pleased to announce that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary is today publishing the annual report of the Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner. The Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner is an independent statutory role. They are appointed by the Home Secretary under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. The report covers the exercise of their statutory functions over the reporting year from April 2023 to March 2024.
This was the first and final report by Tony Eastaugh before leaving his post on 18 August 2024. I am grateful for his contribution to this important area of work and will be seeking to appoint a new commissioner to fill this position as soon as possible. The report has been laid before the House and will be available from the Vote Office and on gov.uk.
[HCWS276]
(2 months ago)
Commons ChamberWith permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a statement on the Government’s action to tackle antisocial behaviour.
From residential neighbourhoods to busy high streets, from rolling countryside to city centres and from idyllic villages to bustling towns, the places of Britain should be a source of local pride. As well as being safe, they should feel safe for those who live and work in them, yet the dismal reality is that in too many areas the opposite is true. In the last year of the previous Government, shop theft soared by 29% to a 20-year high, street theft surged by 40% and antisocial behaviour reached new heights in our towns and cities. That is the Conservative party’s legacy on law and order.
Up and down the country, people feel uneasy or even unsafe. Unruly gangs roam the streets, creating intimidation and fear, noisy off-road vehicles speed around, disturbing the peace, illegal drugs are abused with brazenness, public spaces are awash with litter and graffiti, and an epidemic of shop theft is plaguing retailers big and small while their staff are subjected to intolerable levels of abuse and violence.
At its core, this is about respect: respect between citizens, respect for our society and the expectations underpinning it, and respect for the rule of law. All those are woven into the fabric of our democracy, but, after years of neglect, that fabric has become worn. We saw a disgraceful illustration of that in the summer when serious disorder erupted in some towns and cities. We see it on a smaller scale every day as decent, law-abiding people suffer due to the selfishness of others.
More than a third of people—36%—in England and Wales report experiencing or witnessing some type of antisocial behaviour in their local area, while about a million incidents of antisocial behaviour were recorded by police in the year to June 2024. We must never make the mistake of dismissing this menace as low-level or trivial; to do so would be an insult to the victims. It may manifest itself in different ways in different areas, but wherever and however it occurs there is an adverse impact on neighbourhoods and communities.
Antisocial behaviour chips away at people’s sense of pride and confidence in their local area. It ruins their enjoyment of public spaces. For those affected by the most serious and persistent cases, their quality of life is damaged. One victim quoted in a report on antisocial behaviour published recently by the Victims Commissioner said this:
“Every day I’m crying…It makes me anxious…and it actually makes me physically sick.”
Another said:
“It’s totally isolating and nobody can understand the pressure it puts on you.”
I am sure that all hon. Members across the House will be familiar with accounts like those from the all-too-frequent interactions we have with our constituents on these issues.
Earlier this month, I visited Leyton in east London, where I heard from local councillors about the importance of partners working together to tackle antisocial behaviour. More recently, the Home Secretary and I met victims of antisocial behaviour and shop theft, Annie Valentine and Brian Roberts from Blackpool and Tim Nye from Sheffield, to hear about their concerns at first hand.
This cannot go on, and the Government will not stand for it. That is why the Prime Minister has made safer streets a central pillar of our agenda for change. A key part of that mission is the work that the Home Secretary is leading alongside police to put visible neighbourhood policing back at the heart of our communities. By restoring that crucial link between police forces and the people they serve, we will ensure that residents and businesses have the reassurance they want and need as well as deterring would-be offenders. As we implement our neighbourhood policing guarantee, we are determined to tackle antisocial behaviour head on. Today, I can update the House on that work.
To turn things around and effectively combat the problem, it is clear that fresh impetus is needed, which is why we committed in our manifesto to introducing respect orders, which will enable tough restrictions to be placed on the worst adult perpetrators of antisocial behaviour. Those subject to a respect order could be banned from a town centre as well as being compelled to address the root cause of their behaviour—for example, through mandated alcohol and drug treatment. The orders will be applied for by the police, by councils or by social housing providers and issued by the courts.
Importantly, there will be a power of arrest available for all suspected breaches, protecting communities and town centres from further harm. We are going even further: anyone who breaches a respect order will have committed a criminal offence and may face up to two years’ imprisonment, an unlimited fine or a community order. These new powers will be piloted first to ensure that they are as effective as possible.
We will also crack down on the scourge of off-road bikes in public parks, dangerous e-scooters on pavements and street racing, all of which inflict misery on local communities. Under strengthened police powers, officers will no longer be required to issue a warning before seizing vehicles involved in antisocial behaviour.
Retail crime harms lives and livelihoods and be must dealt with as the serious threat that it is. We will introduce a new, specific offence of assaulting a retail worker and we will end the effective immunity for shop theft of goods under £200.
The task of making our country safer will not be completed overnight, but this is a Government of action. The work of change is under way and, as we step up this vital effort, we are guided by the simple and unshakeable belief that our streets belong to the decent, law-abiding majority. For far too long, gangs, yobs and thieves have been running amok, and that is not going to happen any more. Under this Government, the safety and security of the public will always come first. We will be unrelenting in our mission to restore respect and take back our streets.
I thank the Minister for her statement and for advance sight of it. It is not right that anyone should live in fear of intimidation in the place that they call home. Antisocial behaviour has real consequences—it can ruin communities and prevent people from making the most of their local area. Antisocial behaviour can make women and girls feel unsafe walking home at night, and it can have a huge impact on shops and businesses if customers are left feeling unsafe visiting their high streets and town centres.
We welcome any focus on antisocial behaviour and efforts to tackle it, but tackling it requires more than a press release or a rebrand. Those in the sector have described the proposed respect orders as wholly unnecessary and near-identical to existing powers already held by the police. We will engage with the Government as proposals are brought forward, but we are keen to see meaningful action rather than just the renaming of public space protection orders and criminal behaviour orders. Changing names will not change outcomes.
The last Government launched the antisocial behaviour action plan, backed by £160 million worth of funding and over 100,000 hours of police and other uniformed patrols, undertaken to target antisocial behaviour hotspots. As of February 2024, our plan led to nearly 600 additional arrests, close to 1,500 stop and searches and around 700 uses of antisocial behaviour powers such as community protection orders and public protection orders.
My own Labour police and crime commissioner in Cleveland has commended the huge contribution made by the last Government’s hotspot policing initiative. Uniform patrols delivered by local authority wardens in Cleveland clocked up a total of 7,685 hours on the streets of Stockton, Hartlepool, Middlesbrough and Redcar. As a result, between 23 September and 24 August, the police reported that incidents of antisocial behaviour were down by 21% in hotspot areas. We also banned nitrous oxide and increased fines for fly-tipping, littering and graffiti, all of which are a blight on our communities. The Conservative Government made sure that the police had the tools to discourage antisocial behaviour, and dedicated funding to support police and crime commissioners to target enforcement in the areas where antisocial behaviour is most prevalent.
The police play a vital role in tackling antisocial behaviour and keeping our communities safe. The Conservative Government invested over £3 billion, including additional funding each year. That rolled into Government grants to enable the recruitment of 20,000 additional police officers—a Government priority and a manifesto commitment. By March this year, the police headcount hit 149,769—a record number of police, and 3,000 higher than previous records. Last year, the Conservative Government arranged a £922 million increase in funding for frontline policing for this financial year—something I hope will be matched next year. Does the Minister agree that in order to tackle antisocial behaviour, we must ensure that police have the necessary resources and support?
The right hon. Lady spoke about Labour’s manifesto commitment to provide 13,000 additional police officers, police community support officers and specials, but has failed to set out any of the detail of when those officers will be recruited and which forces will receive those additional officers. Can she explain how these respect orders are different from the failed antisocial behaviour orders, or the existing public space protection orders or criminal behaviour orders? Our action plan puts safety, security and a basic respect for others at its heart. Will she commit to continuing the hotspot policing initiative, especially as we can already see the results across the country? I know I have asked before, but I never quite managed to get an answer: the last Government increased funding for frontline policing by £922 million for this year—will the Government match that increase next year?
I am grateful to the shadow Minister for acknowledging in his opening comments the effect that antisocial behaviour can have on communities and on individuals. But during the rest of his response, he seemed to have lapsed back into that condition that affects a number of right hon. and hon. Members on the Opposition Benches: amnesia about what happened over the course of their 14 years in power, including the vicious cuts to policing, with over 20,000 police officers and thousands of police staff cut. Trying to ignore the legacy that we have inherited and are having to deal with today is not satisfactory from the Dispatch Box.
I am going to answer the questions, if the hon. Lady will give me an opportunity to do so. [Interruption.] I think a little courtesy in the House is helpful. We are talking about antisocial behaviour, and a number of my comments were about respect, which is very important in this House.
Order. Can we have less noise and heckling from the Back Benches?
I have always tried to be respectful to all Members of this House, and I will now try to deal with some of the points made by the shadow Minister.
The most important point for the shadow Minister to understand is that respect orders are different from criminal behaviour orders—I do not think he quite understood that. Criminal behaviour orders are attached where there is a conviction, and the Crown Prosecution Service applies in court for that criminal behaviour order. Respect orders will not require a conviction. They will be made on application to court by councils, social housing providers and the police. A power of arrest will be attached if they are breached, and that individual will be brought before the magistrates court if that breach happens. They are different from a criminal behaviour order. They are also different in the sense that they are not community protection notices, which I think the shadow Minister referred to, which are for lower-level environmental antisocial behaviour issues.
In the conversations I have had with individuals in the sector and organisations that work in this field, respect orders got a lot of support. We want to pilot them. We want to make sure that they will work fully when we bring them in across the country. I am confident that they will provide the flexibility of a civil injunction, which is what deals with antisocial behaviour at the moment. But if a civil injunction is breached, the police officer has to take the individual to court to prove the breach. There is no automatic power of arrest. That is the difference from the respect order. It combines the flexibility of the civil injunction with the teeth of the criminal behaviour order. I hope that explains to the shadow Minister why respect orders are a very positive development to deal with antisocial behaviour.
I welcome the measures that the Minister has set out today and the Government’s commitment to tackling antisocial behaviour, which is an urgent issue in my constituency, particularly in town centres. But the most urgent issue that we face in tackling these issues is the number of police officers. My hon. Friend will be aware that the previous Government allocated funding to recruit police officers, and then withdrew it when the Met was unable to meet its target due to a set of unique challenges in London. Can my right hon. Friend give her firm assurance that the unique challenges facing the Met are fully understood, and that the Government will provide it with the resources that it needs to tackle this very serious issue in our communities?
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising this issue. The Met makes up almost a quarter of overall policing. It plays a very important part in policing London, but it also has other responsibilities at national level—counter-terrorism and so on. Decisions on funding are being taken at the moment. The House will be informed in the normal way next month about the provisional settlements for policing, but I hear my hon. Friend concerns very clearly.
I call the Liberal Democrats spokesperson, who knows that she has a maximum of two minutes.
I am grateful to the hon. Lady for her comments and questions. First, the specific issue we want to address is giving the police the powers they need to deal with the antisocial behaviour that is being caused by off-road bikes and e-bikes. The hon. Lady also spoke about what else the police need to be able to implement those changes effectively, and I will contact her with more details on that. I will certainly talk to the police about what more we can do to support them.
As to the neighbourhood policing guarantee and our commitment to put 13,000 police officers, PCSOs and specials into our neighbourhoods, I am sure the hon. Lady will recognise that we are five months into this Government. We are working as hard as we can to get plans in place. We are doing this work with policing. We want to ensure that the police are with us on this and that we have everything set up to allow that to happen smoothly, and those announcements will be made in due course. I want to reassure the House that making that happen is probably my No. 1 priority.
I welcome the Government’s plans to introduce respect orders to tackle the scourge of antisocial behaviour. I hear from my constituents in Battersea all the time on their concerns and worries about antisocial behaviour in parts of our community. Can the Minister confirm that the new orders will also include public drinking and drug use to ensure that our communities are safe and free from harm and nuisance?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right: we want to address issues such as street drinking and taking drugs. The whole idea of a respect order will be restrictive in the sense that an individual may be told that they can no longer be in a certain area, such as on the high street, in a town centre or in a park. However, positive conditions will also be attached: if there were issues around someone street drinking, they could attend courses for alcohol addiction; they could attend courses or treatment for drug addiction; if it was appropriate, they could attend courses on anger. In that way, we will be dealing with the problem in the area, but also trying to treat the underlying issue with the individual who has caused the antisocial behaviour.
I certainly support the Minister’s intent in bringing this forward, but I am still struggling to understand what the material difference is between these respect orders and antisocial behaviour orders. If it is the case that they are materially different, will the Minister say in what respects they are, and will she say to what extent that will be based on perception by a complainant? We have recently had considerable controversy around perception of an allegation and its effects in non-crime hate incidents, which has caused all manner of problems and bogged the police down in a whole load of controversy. I am sure the Minister would want to avoid that with this particular measure.
I say first to the right hon. Gentleman that changes were made to the antisocial behaviour legislation in 2014; in fact, it was weakened. The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats in coalition decided to weaken the antisocial behaviour powers that the previous Labour Government had brought in. That is the first thing to mention.
What we have ended up with are the civil injunctions. As I tried to explain earlier on—perhaps I need to do it again, and be a little clearer—civil injunctions can be issued for antisocial behaviour, but if they are breached by someone behaving antisocially in a town centre or on a high street, the police have to go to court to prove the breach. That is the issue. They cannot be arrested, and the antisocial behaviour cannot be stopped at that point. There is a process that has to be gone through. With the respect orders, there will be an automatic arrest for breach, which means action can be taken far more quickly. That is the key point.
The criminal behaviour orders, which we discussed earlier as well, can be attached only to someone who has been convicted. Those orders are about trying to nip the antisocial behaviour that is causing “harassment, alarm or distress”—that is the definition that is used. That is the level necessary to be able to apply for a respect order.
I hope that explains to the right hon. Gentleman the difference and why we think the way to go forward is to deal with things through arrest and get people in front of a court if they breach respect orders.
In a recent survey of residents of Telford, it was overwhelmingly clear that they had had enough of the inaction of the past 14 years. I welcome the respect orders coming into the police officer toolkit. Can the Minister confirm that they will give the authorities the power to seize and crush off-road bikes, to seize booze off drunken yobs and to deal with those who consume drugs in our town centres? We also need a return to neighbourhood policing, so that we have coppers back on the streets, patrolling their communities.
I am mindful of your instruction, Madam Deputy Speaker.
I can absolutely say that this is about rebuilding that neighbourhood presence to put those police officers, PCSOs and specials back in our communities and deal with exactly the issues that my hon. Friend has raised, with people drinking, taking drugs, riding vehicles and causing harassment, alarm, and distress.
The hon. Gentleman will know that where police stations are located and how many there are is a matter for police and crime commissioners, or, in the case of the Metropolitan police, for the Mayor of London and the deputy Mayor. Those are not decisions that I or any Minister would be involved in; they are operational decisions for PCCs and the Mayor.
I wholeheartedly welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement today. Every week, I meet residents who very sadly have their lives disturbed, and sometimes even ruined, by appalling crime and antisocial behaviour, so I am delighted that the Minister is bringing forward these clearly well thought through and well explained measures. Would she perhaps consider Reading for one of the pilot schemes in this very important set of measures?
There are many right hon. and hon. Members who are pitching for their constituencies to be one of the pilots, and I will certainly add Reading to the list.
Antisocial behaviour affects all our constituencies, including my constituency of Broxbourne. Some antisocial behaviour can be very localised—down a specific street, in a block of flats or between neighbours—and some of the levers to solve that antisocial behaviour lie with housing associations. Will the Minister outline how we can bring housing associations to the table? They will play a key role in solving and tackling antisocial behaviour.
As I said in my remarks, housing associations and social housing providers will be able to apply for respect orders. I ought to say, as well, that the existing civil injunctions will be renamed as housing injunctions, which will deal with that more low-level antisocial behaviour between neighbours. Housing associations might want to use those as well, but they will be able to use both respect orders and housing injunctions.
I welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement. Does she agree that the biggest boost to antisocial behaviour we have seen in recent times was the cut of 21,000 police officers by the previous Tory Government, which resulted in the decimation of our local safer neighbourhood police teams? I really welcome her commitment to bringing them back. In addition, the London-hating Conservatives cut the London police budget, so much so that we have a black hole in the budget now that is forcing the commissioner to cut officers. Can she assure me that she is aware of that and will address it, so that we can start to put safer neighbourhood teams back where my constituents in Eltham and Chislehurst want to see them?
It is always helpful to have experienced and long-standing Members of Parliament to remind us of what has actually happened, because, as I pointed out earlier, there seems to be some amnesia on the Opposition Benches.
An estimated 60,000 hours of police time was spent on non-crime hate incidents in the past 12 months, and we already hear about burglaries not being investigated for lack of police time. So, while welcoming the description of the problem, how is it to be solved unless chief constables are to be directed to reorder their priorities?
The Government have made very clear our priorities for policing: protecting the public, as I talked about today; rebuilding neighbourhood policing; tackling town centre crime; tackling antisocial behaviour; tackling the scourge of knife crime; and halving violence against women and girls in the next decade. The Home Secretary has also been very clear about the common-sense approach that needs to be adopted when dealing with non-crime hate incidents. We are working with His Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary and fire and rescue services, and the College of Policing, on how best that can be done. It is vital though—I think the right hon. Gentleman will agree—that police forces are able to track and monitor information and intelligence that might be helpful if there is going to be further criminal activity or serious social harm, and community cohesion will be affected. Capturing that is something police forces need to do.
In Doncaster, along with many other areas across the country, antisocial behaviour, fly-tipping, shoplifting and off-road bikes are blighting our communities and our high streets. As a former prison officer, I know that in dealing with these issues it is critical that we tackle the causes and pathways to crime in the first place. What are the Government doing to make it a priority to tackle the causes as well as the crimes themselves?
I welcome my hon. Friend; her experience as a former prison officer will be invaluable in this place, bringing that knowledge to share in our debates. She is absolutely right; prevention, which has been ignored for too long, is really important, particularly in relation to young people. That is why we will set up the Young Futures programme—the youth hubs—to, as the Home Secretary said, wrap our arms around those teenagers who might be getting into trouble, making the wrong decisions, and getting involved in things that they should not be involved in, and we will have that preventive pathway to ensure that they start to take the right steps forward.
My constituent Linda, along with other members of my community, is extremely concerned about antisocial behaviour in Burgess Hill. Car racing, e-scooters and bike thefts are causing fear and distress to residents across the town. As the Minister noted in her statement, the impact of that behaviour should not be minimised. I have raised these issues with both Sussex police and the police and crime commissioner. What can the Minister do to ensure that Sussex police have sufficient resources to stop a small number of perpetrators having a disproportionate effect on law-abiding constituents across Mid Sussex?
Sussex Members of Parliament are listening very closely to the Minister.
Announcements on the provisional police settlement will be made in the usual way next month. The Home Secretary has already indicated that an additional half a billion pounds will be made available for policing. That has already been announced. With regard to the direct figures for Sussex, I am afraid that the hon. Lady and you, Madam Deputy Speaker, will have to wait a few more days.
I never thought that I would see the day when we had Conservative Members arguing against more powers to increase the safety of our communities up and down the country—it is absolutely gobsmacking. I, for one, absolutely support what the Minister is bringing in today in relation to respect orders. My constituents feel the impact of antisocial behaviour very keenly, but they will want some assurance from the Minister that there will be sufficient police officers and PCSOs available to issue respect orders in a timely manner. Can she do that, please?
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that question. It is rather odd that the picture painted by the Opposition is that all the powers are there so everything is fine and why do we need to change things, when it is quite clear to the vast majority of people, I think, that things are not fine and the powers and the legislation are not working as we need them to. That is why we are bringing forward these additional respect orders and the neighbourhood policing guarantee—the 13,000 police officers, specials and PCSOs who we want to have back in our community to actually use the legislation and get antisocial behaviour under control.
Antisocial behaviour is a blight on our communities and I agree that the police should be given the resources to tackle it. In my constituency, Cambridgeshire Constabulary is overstretched. In the past week, the Policing Minister has twice dismissed my question as to whether she would review the police allocation formula so that it receives its fair share of funding, and my constituents have noticed. Will she review the formula? If not, how will the Government meet their guarantee for neighbourhood policing?
Can I just say to the hon. Gentleman that I have not dismissed anything? I am very conscious of and take seriously my responsibilities in the allocation of resources for policing. We have been in power for five months and we have to announce next month the provisional police settlement for 2025-26. Those figures will be announced in a few weeks’ time. As to whether we want to look longer term at resources, we of course keep that all under review. But for the moment, the thing I think most MPs are concerned about is the allocation for next year. That is what I am working on at the moment. That is the thing the Home Secretary is working on. We are trying to do our best and the Home Secretary has already announced an additional half a billion pounds for policing.
Does my right hon. Friend agree that an important component of ensuring that our streets belong to law-abiding citizens is the good work of councils such as mine, for example in providing highly professional community wardens with enforcement powers, working in partnership with business improvement district rangers and the police? Does she agree that that innovative approach to the antisocial behaviour ecosystem might lend itself to Rugby being high up the list to be a pilot?
I will certainly add Rugby to the list. My hon. Friend makes an important point about how this cannot just be done with the police alone; it has to be done alongside councils. I commend the use of community wardens, who are a great resource for communities in dealing with antisocial behaviour. Social housing providers are also key. This has to be about partnership working.
I welcome the commitment to neighbourhood policing that will help Cheltenham fight its problems with graffiti and illegal e-bikes, but when I talk to my local police commissioner he warns me that he is expecting to have to work very hard to maintain the force’s current headcount because of budgetary pressures in the coming year. Can the Minister explain the apparent disconnect between the concerns of the commissioner locally and the Government’s statement today?
I do not think anybody is pretending that we have inherited a positive, rosy economic settlement from the previous Government. We are having to make difficult decisions and tough choices. What is very clear is that the security and safety of the British people is the No. 1 issue for this Government, and that the Home Secretary—as I have now said, I think, three times—has already said there is additional funding for policing next year. Additional funding was put into police forces up and down the country this year to fund the pay increase to police officers, which had not been in the budget that the previous Government had set for this year. We have already put in additional money, and we will be doing so next year as well.
Illegal bikes are an absolute menace for people in Tilehurst, and indeed for all my constituents. I welcome the tough and swift action that the Government are taking on illegal bikes and antisocial behaviour, issues about which the Conservatives were clearly far too relaxed when they were in government. As well as associating myself with the request from my hon. Friend the Member for Reading Central (Matt Rodda), may I ask the Minister whether there will be new powers for the police to seize illegal bikes, get them off our streets and tackle this terrible problem?
I hear very clearly that those bikes, along with off-road motorbikes, are a problem up and down the country, and we are looking at that. What we can announce today is that we will be getting rid of the requirement for a warning, but we are certainly considering what else we need to do to ensure that the problem is dealt with properly by the police.
I welcome the Minister’s commitment to tackling antisocial behaviour. There is a particular problem in Fore Street, in my constituency, where those who abuse drugs and alcohol gather and make a nuisance of themselves. Will she please consider adding Bridgwater to her list of possible candidates for the pilot scheme?
I must say that I am very pleased to hear a Conservative Member of Parliament asking to be added to our list of pilot areas for the respect orders. I will certainly do that.
I wish to associate myself with the comments that have been made about the scourge of illegal motorbikes. They are a particular scourge in communities across Tipton, Wednesbury and Coseley. One of my favourite pledges in the Labour party’s manifesto was the pledge to seize those bikes without notice and crush them within 48 hours. Can the Minister tell us how soon we will get on with crushing the bikes?
Today I am able to say that we are going to do that. My hon. Friend will have to wait a little longer for the details and the timetable, but that is certainly my intention.
I welcomed much of the Minister’s statement. Shoplifting is a significant problem in my constituency, and shop workers in Littleport and Ely have recently told me how threatened they feel and how stressful it is. What will she do to ensure that our local police—who, as we have heard, are very stretched—have the resources and capacity needed to attend shoplifting incidents and deal with the criminals?
What I often hear from shopkeepers and shop workers is that they do not report shop theft because they think no one will come and nothing will be done. That is one reason why the neighbourhood policing guarantee—bringing police officers back to our high streets and town and village centres—is so important. Those shop workers and shop owners will know that there is a visible police presence to deter but also to deal with those who try to shoplift; that action will be taken against them; and that there will be consequences for people who steal. We are getting rid of the £200 threshold and saying, “If you steal, that is a criminal offence and there are consequences.” During the riots in the summer, people in my own constituency in Hull were looting in shops, thinking that there were no consequences. There are consequences for theft.
I recently held a public meeting about the concerning rise of antisocial behaviour in Haxby, and I want to thank the deputy mayor of York and North Yorkshire, Jo Coles, Haxby town council, the police and the local community for their efforts. Does my right hon. Friend agree that respect orders could play a key role in reducing antisocial behaviour in the town, and will she meet me to discuss this in more detail?
I would be delighted to meet my hon. Friend. I think that what he has described demonstrates the role of partnership working in dealing with antisocial behaviour.
Rural crime is defined as crime and antisocial behaviour occurring in rural areas, which is very logical, but in my region just 0.24% of staff in the local police force are dedicated to rural crime units, despite the significant impact on communities in places such as Brecon and Ystradgynlais. Does the Minister agree with the Liberal Democrat proposal that every police force should have a specialist co-ordinator in its rural crime team, in line with recommendations from the National Rural Crime Network?
I take crime, urban or rural, very seriously. The neighbourhood policing guarantee, for example, is not just about urban areas; it has to cover rural areas as well. People living in rural areas should feel that when they need the police, the police will come, and that there is a police presence in their communities. I am happy to discuss rural crime further with the hon. Gentleman, if there are specific points that he wishes to raise with me.
Since I was elected, there has been a constant stream of antisocial behaviour incidents across the towns that I represent, at Hindley Town and Ashton Athletic football clubs and in Platt Bridge and Winstanley. It really dents people’s pride in the towns that they live in, as the Minister said. Does she agree that the capacity for councils and housing associations to apply for and issue respect orders is a vital part of the new powers that she has announced today?
Yes, I absolutely agree. This is not just about the police; it has to involve councils, social housing providers and the other agencies that will tackle, together, the scourge of antisocial behaviour.
I thank the Minister for her statement. Does she agree that antisocial behaviour is a plague throughout the United Kingdom, and that the remedy lies across several Departments? Obviously an increase in community policing is vital, but so too is youth sector funding to create safe spaces for our young people. Does she agree that we need investment across multiple Departments, dealing with matters from policing to education to communities? What discussions has she had with her Cabinet colleagues to ascertain whether such a joined-up approach could be more effective?
The hon. Gentleman has expressed very eloquently the role of mission-led government that this party is taking on. The mission on safer streets, which covers antisocial behaviour, is cross-governmental. It is not just about the Home Office, although we are the lead Government body in this context; it has to encompass all the other parts of Government, as well as local authorities and housing providers. This has to be a partnership, and it has to be cross-governmental.
Antisocial behaviour is sadly a blight on our town centre in St Austell, but also on many smaller clay country villages in my constituency. I therefore welcome the Minister’s announcement on respect orders, and invite the Government to pilot them in St Austell. What impact does the Minister expect these orders to have, when it comes to revitalising our once thriving town centres?
I will add my hon. Friend’s constituency to the list. Our purpose in piloting respect orders is to see what works and what the effect is, but we are confident that the ability to arrest someone who breaches an order will speed things up. We hear the complaint that when people are subject to antisocial behaviour orders, there has to be a long process of going to court and proving the breach. This is about arresting and dealing with the person who breaches an order quickly.
I welcome the Minister’s announcement, not just as a former Crown prosecutor but because the towns in my constituency are sadly not immune from antisocial behaviour. We often see a small group of people repeatedly committing this offence in our towns. Does the Minister agree that respect orders will be a useful intervention tool for dealing with repeat offenders, and for tackling the root causes of their behaviour?
I welcome my hon. Friend to these exchanges. Her experience as a former Crown prosecutor is valuable and useful. She is right: it is usually a small group of people who engage in antisocial behaviour. We will deal with prolific offenders not just by using respect orders but by giving them something positive that they need, such as drug or alcohol addiction treatment or anger management courses, to try to solve the underlying problems.
Residents in Kenrick Way, in West Brom, dread Friday and Saturday nights, because selfish people race their cars up and down the street, causing deafening noise and extremely dangerous crashes. This has been going on for years and years, despite the efforts of Sandwell council and the West Midlands police. What will today’s announcement do to stop the racers and give residents in West Brom some peace and quiet?
My hon. Friend raises an issue that we have talked about a lot this afternoon. Under the law at the moment, there has to be a warning given before any action can be taken to deal with people who are racing and causing harm and distress with the vehicles that they are using. This is about getting rid of the requirement for a warning, so that action can be taken in a far more speedy way.
May I add St Helens to the list of places that are interested in being a pilot area? I warmly welcome today’s announcement. As the Minister and others have said, there is nothing low-level about antisocial behaviour. It can destroy lives and communities, and it is right that we take it seriously. I am particularly pleased to hear about the steps taken to protect shop workers, and to hear that shoplifting will be taken seriously. Can the Minister tell me a bit more about how that might help shop workers in St Helens North? Does she agree that although it is great that we are giving the police more powers to tackle antisocial behaviour, they need resources to make a real difference in our communities?
I will certainly add my hon. Friend’s constituency to the list—it is growing, which is always positive. Proposals on retail crime and assaults on retail workers will be included in the crime and policing Bill next year. It is important to remember that people have campaigned for a stand-alone offence for many years, and there is now cross-party support for the offence, thanks to the campaigning of USDAW and the Co-op over many years.
I welcome today’s announcement on respect orders, which will be extremely welcome news for my constituents in Leeds South West and Morley. It is so good to finally have a Government who will deal with the scourge of antisocial behaviour. I have sat with constituents who have been in tears as they explained how their neighbour was making their life hell. Constituents have told me, at my surgery, that the police and the council’s antisocial behaviour teams had no power to act. Respect orders finally offer us the chance to change that. In the Minister’s statement, she said that respect orders would be reserved for the worst offenders. I can think of several people who would fit that criterion, so what reassurance will she give my constituents that it will be applied as liberally as possible?
The definition that I gave earlier—causing harassment, alarm or distress—will be used when respect orders are applied for. I ought to say that civil injunctions will remain in place when it comes to housing, so those can be used. Respect orders will be only for adults; for young people, the youth injunction will still be available, and there are sanctions within that. There will be a range of ways that antisocial behaviour can be tackled, using either respect orders or the reformed civil injunctions.
Hemel Hempstead has some of the worst antisocial behaviour in our part of the county. We have hotspots such as Livingstone Walk, Hosking Court, Waveney and Swallowfields, where there are issues such as drug use, boy racers with modified exhausts, abandoned vehicles, shoplifting and drunken noise; I have seen the evidence of that while out on the streets with local police. Fortunately, Hemel police are carrying out a great pilot project in Grovehill to try to clear the area, rebuild relations and deal with the thugs there. Could the Policing Minister kindly outline how the new respect orders will help Hemel police to do that great work, and will she join me in paying tribute to them for the work that they do to clean up our streets?
I will absolutely join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to the police and other partner agencies, such as councils and housing associations, for the work that they already do. There is a great deal of good work going on around the country, and we need to build on that and give the police and others the powers that they need to take the action that they want to take on antisocial behaviour, which has just grown and grown in recent times. I wonder whether my hon. Friend would like to add his constituency to the list of pilot areas.
For too many communities, antisocial behaviour has become a nightmare, but my constituents in Bracknell are literally losing sleep over noisy and dangerous off-road bikes, which are being driven on footpaths, often late at night, so they will really welcome the tough new powers announced in the statement. Does the Minister believe that those powers will finally allow my constituents to get a good night’s sleep?
We all know the importance of a good night’s sleep, so I hope very much that respect orders will go some way towards delivering that. There may be additional things that we need to do, but it is at least a start to remove the requirement for a warning before action can be taken to get these vehicles off our roads, parks and pavements, because they are causing such problems.
We have saved the best till last. I call Andrew Pakes.
I think there is an unwritten rule in this House that whoever asks the last question gets to be top of the pilot list. Given its beautiful cathedral and wonderful diversity, Peterborough city centre is the jewel in Cambridgeshire’s crown, as I am sure that county colleagues present will agree, but we are being let down by the rise in antisocial behaviour. Shoplifting, street drinking, theft and intimidation are the big issues raised with me by residents, businesses and Peterborough Positive, our fantastic business improvement district. Does the Minister recognise the sheer anger that the British public feel about the fact that antisocial behaviour has not been dealt with, and about the way that they have been ghosted by the Conservative party, which, when it comes to dealing with antisocial behaviour, told them that they never had it so good? Will she explain to the House how the measures announced today will help restore trust and faith in the ability of the Government to address antisocial behaviour?
My hon. Friend is the last to ask a question, but it was a very important one. He is absolutely right: there is a huge amount of anger about how things were allowed to get to this point. There is complacency around the fact that there have been huge cuts to policing over the years, and there has not been the investment in neighbourhood policing that we need. Where we are is testament to that, and it is why we have to tackle antisocial behaviour.
My hon. Friend also makes an important point about businesses, which are part of how we tackle the scourge of antisocial behaviour in town centres. We are working with businesses, and are encouraging small businesses to team up with BIDs and other groups in their city centres, so that they work together and get information to help them deal with shoplifting.
(2 months ago)
Commons ChamberIn the last year of the previous Government, shop theft reached a record high, and we saw intolerable levels of abuse against shop workers, leaving people fearful of going to work. This Government will not stand by as these crimes devastate our high streets and town centres. That is why we are committed to rebuilding neighbourhood policing, scrapping the £200 limit, which has let thieves steal below the level with impunity, and introducing a new, stand-alone offence of assaulting a retail worker.
Our shop workers will be putting in some long, hard shifts in the coming weeks to help us to get ready for Christmas, but a report from the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers has said that their risk of being the victims of assault in the workplace has doubled in the last year. Will my right hon. Friend join me in commending USDAW’s Freedom from Fear campaign and affirm that the Government’s commitment to removing the immunity from certain types of shoplifting introduced by the Conservative Government will proceed at pace?
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for highlighting USDAW’s findings and its tireless campaigning alongside the Co-op for the new stand-alone offence of assaulting a retail worker, which we will be proud to introduce in the forthcoming crime and policing Bill alongside the scrapping of the £200 limit. I take this opportunity to recognise the commitment of Cleveland’s police and crime commissioner, Matt Storey, in tackling retail crime. I look forward to working with all police and crime commissioners to tackle this scourge on our communities.
Shoplifting is a crime that threatens the feeling of safety for shoppers and shop workers alike. In my constituency of East Worthing and Shoreham, the issue has become so severe that in the past year a resident has described it as an epidemic. Can my right hon. Friend please tell me how the Government plan to tackle this issue, so that shoppers and businesses in my area can operate in safety and with confidence?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right that people in East Worthing and Shoreham and across the entire country want to know how this Government are going to tackle this epidemic. I have referred to the 13,000 neighbourhood police officers, respect orders, the abolition of the £200 threshold limit and the stand-alone offence of assaulting a shop worker. I want to restore confidence in the people my hon. Friend represents—confidence that will make them feel their streets are safer—and ensure that criminals in their area pay the price for their crimes.
My constituency team and I recently visited shops on one of the busiest high streets in my constituency. Of the first 10 we visited, nine said that their staff had suffered attacks at work, and all 10 said that shoplifting was now pretty much a daily occurrence. Does the Minister agree that extra resources and extra policing are part of the answer, but that we should also be looking at programmes such as offender to rehab schemes—one of which has been rolled out in the west midlands—to make sure we are also tackling the causes of retail crime?
My hon. Friend paints a deeply upsetting and unacceptable picture of the impact that aggressive and repeated shop theft can have on retail workers. The worst thing is that we know that it is replicated up and down the entire country; we cannot continue like this. That is why we are determined to take the action that I have set out in previous answers, but I agree that we have to look at issues around rehabilitation for offenders, including treatment for addiction where appropriate.
Bath is a very popular tourist and shopping destination, but it has also seen the highest increase in shoplifting offences between 2023 and 2024. For my shopkeepers to feel safe, they want a much more visible police presence in Bath. What can the Government do for them?
The hon. Lady is absolutely right. Shop theft went up by 21% in the previous year, which is totally unacceptable, and I hear very clearly what she says about her constituency of Bath. That is why the neighbourhood policing model that this Labour Government stood on at the general election is so important for starting to deal with shop theft, which—as we have just been talking about—has become an epidemic.
The Home Secretary has repeatedly reiterated her pledge to tackle shoplifting and violence against shop workers by having a named officer in each community, as part of the 13,000 uplift for neighbourhood policing. I spoke to Cambridgeshire constabulary recently, which confirmed that under the Home Secretary’s plans there would be one police officer to cover the whole town of St Ives. That officer would cover not only St Ives, but the town of Ramsey and all the villages in between—Woodhurst, Old Hurst, Pidley, Warboys, Wistow and Bury. Last week, the Policing Minister would not commit to reviewing the police allocation formula to ensure Cambridgeshire receives its fair share of funding. How can one officer be expected to cover such a large area effectively, given that Cambridgeshire is likely to receive only a handful of the officers?
I say gently to the hon. Member that he has to look at what this Government inherited from his Conservative Government after 14 years, during which neighbourhood policing was repeatedly cut. This Government are committed to restoring neighbourhood policing. We have said that we will bring in 13,000 police officers, police community support officers and specials.
The shadow Home Secretary is shouting “When?” at me. We are working on this as quickly as we can, five months in, after 14 years of what the Conservatives did to our policing.
Shoplifting is often organised by criminal gangs, and Norfolk police have had some success in fighting them. Does the Minister recognise that partnerships such as Operation Wonderland—which has just been launched by West Norfolk police alongside the local council, CCTV operators, street rangers and shop workers—are key to tackling this crime and making sure offenders are brought to justice?
The hon. Gentleman makes a very important point. Policing alone cannot deal with this crime; we need to work hand in hand with businesses, as well as the trade unions. USDAW has been very important in the campaign for the offence of assaulting a shop worker that we are going to bring in. I have also met the British Retail Consortium, and will chair a regular forum with the retail sector to make sure we are sharing best practice. We are going to deal with the problems we have inherited.
One of the best ways to help tackle retail crime is to put more police on the streets. The last Conservative Government did just that—[Interruption.] The last Conservative Government did just that, delivering record numbers of police, with more funding than ever before, but we were not stopping there. This year, the Conservative Government increased frontline police funding by £922 million. Will the Minister commit to matching or even improving that figure next year?
I do not know if it is just amnesia on that side of the House, but I think the Shadow Minister needs to reflect on what we actually inherited: PCSOs cut by 50%, specials down by two thirds and over 20,000 police officers cut under the Conservative Administration. So a little bit of humility about what they have left us with would go down very well.
The epidemic of knife crime that has grown over the last decade is devastating families and communities right across the country. That is why this Government have set ourselves an unprecedented mission to halve knife crime over the next 10 years. We are already taking action to get lethal blades off Britain’s streets and taking stronger action against illegal online knife sales. We are also determined to stop young people being drawn into violent crime and county lines in the first place, which is why we are delivering a radical new young futures prevention programme, with targeted interventions to help at risk young people and a network of new youth hubs.
I thank the Minister for meeting me recently. As she says, too many young people are being drawn into county lines, suffering exploitation and violence. This is a significant problem across the country, including in Norwich. Many organisations are working hard locally to improve the situation, such as the Joe Dix Foundation, established by his parents after Joe’s tragic murder in 2022. Can the Minister reassure me that the Government are investing all they can in preventive measures and set out what is being done to support organisations on the frontline?
It was a great pleasure to meet my hon. Friend just last week to discuss this issue. Organisations like the Joe Dix Foundation do amazing work to help keep people safe and keep young people out of county line gangs in particular, and through the Home Office county lines programme we are going after exploitative gangs and providing specialist support for children and young people. Our young futures programme will establish those prevention partnerships in every local authority to identify children and young people at risk.
The Minister speaks of the young futures programme. Will she work with the Northern Ireland Executive to put in place the same programmes so that we can prevent young people in Northern Ireland from joining paramilitary organisations, which are nothing more than organised and violent crime organisations?
I can certainly talk to Ministers in the Northern Ireland Office to discuss what we can learn from the proposed programme and the good practice we know exists already in many parts of the UK. We want to build on that so I am very happy to share that.
Sorry, Mr Speaker. These questions are like buses—they all come along at once.
Vehicle theft is a deeply distressing and damaging crime which can have a detrimental effect on both individuals and businesses, including in rural communities. That is why we are working closely with both the police and the automotive industry to ensure the most robust responses possible to these crimes. Last week I met with the National Police Chiefs’ Council lead for vehicle crime to discuss this issue and how we can better work together to prevent it.
An increase in car and van thefts and antisocial behaviour in Stocksbridge, Deepcar, High Green, Chapeltown and Dodworth has left my constituents feeling vulnerable and unsafe. Local people have also experienced excessive 999 response times. How is the Minister tackling the rise in vehicle thefts, working with manufacturers to improve vehicle safety and supporting South Yorkshire police after years of Conservative cuts?
I am pleased that this question is being asked, and it is important to note that this autumn, driven by the National Police Chiefs’ Council lead for vehicle crime, the national vehicle crime reduction partnership has been launched, bringing together the police, the Home Office and manufacturers on the very point of how we tackle this problem. We are also committed to bringing forward legislation to ban electronic devices used to steal vehicles, empowering the police and courts to target those criminals using, manufacturing and supplying them.
That was a welcome answer from the Minister. Farmers in Wiltshire complain not just about car theft, which is endemic, but wider agricultural theft, too, and the terrible scourge of hare coursing. It is all bound up in serious organised crime. Does the Minister recognise the seriousness of organised rural crime of this nature, and what steps is she taking to address it?
The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. I recently met the Agricultural Engineers Association to discuss the implementation of the Equipment Theft (Prevention) Act 2023, which he will know is important in tackling some of that rural crime with agricultural equipment that has been stolen, often by organised gangs. There is work ongoing on this, and the issue is recognised by the Home Office.
We all want to stop criminals terrorising our communities, whether they are domestic abusers or shoplifters targeting our high streets. Live facial recognition is being rolled out by our police forces, including on Sutton High Street in my constituency, but we cannot ignore the risks that this technology presents. Facial recognition systems are most likely to misidentify black people and women, doing nothing to stop crime and further eroding trust in our police. Will the Minister introduce clear regulation oversight of live facial recognition, such as that which the EU passed last April?
This is another area where the new incoming Labour Government are having to look at powers and measures brought in by the previous Government. Live facial recognition can have very positive effects, but we need to consider whether we need a framework around it. That is why I will be hosting a series of roundtables before Christmas to discuss with stakeholders the way forward on this technology.
What steps is the Minister taking to tackle crime in rural areas?
As I said earlier, I have met representatives of the Agricultural Engineers Association to discuss the implementation of the secondary legislation that is required to deal with the theft of agricultural equipment, and I am also having meetings with the rural crime units to discuss some of the specifics. However, the neighbourhood policing guarantee applies in rural areas just as much as in urban areas, which is important.
A report published today shows that 60,000 hours are taken up each year investigating non-crime hate incidents. Does the Minister agree that confidence in the police could be restored if they prioritised their time and resources to investigate actual crime rather than hurt feelings?
This Government have made very clear what our priorities are around safer streets and where the focus should be for policing: on halving knife crime and halving violence against women and girls over the next decade. The Home Secretary has also been very clear that a common-sense approach must be taken to non-crime hate incidents. We will work with the inspectorate and the College of Policing on the matter.