(1 week, 2 days ago)
Commons Chamber
Rebecca Smith
No, I have already given way twice. I will not get any more time. I am very sorry.
We must avoid a situation in which the law views children as the state’s ultimate responsibility while parents must justify their involvement on a case-by-case basis. We must also avoid anything that presumes that the state makes a better parent than the actual parents themselves. Of course, the state should intervene when a child is at risk, but our default position should be that, wherever it is safe and appropriate, children benefit from the love and guidance of both their parents. The state should step in only when there is clear evidence that it should do so, and we do not reject that point. If we remove this principle from the law, we take another step towards a system in which parental involvement becomes discretionary and the state’s role becomes paramount. That is not a healthy direction for family justice.
I recognise, of course, that this is a sensitive issue for survivors of domestic abuse. To be clear, there is no absolute right to contact under existing law. Courts already have the power to restrict unsafe contact. The presumption of parental involvement is already qualified by risk of harm to the child, so why do we need this clause at all? Surely we in this House should be ensuring that current safeguards work properly instead.
As I said in a recent debate on fathers and male role models,
“There is a widespread perception that family courts make it difficult for fathers to maintain a meaningful relationship with their children.”—[Official Report, 10 September 2026; Vol. 790, c. 450WH.]
One possible solution is a child-centred parental relationship test. The test would direct courts to consider the quality and sustainability of the child’s relationship with each parent. It would help courts to distinguish between safe and harmful contact.
As things stand, there is a real risk that clause 17 will weaken, not strengthen, children’s relationships with safe parents without addressing the current failures that leave children exposed to their unsafe ones. Fundamentally, parental involvement is a relationship recognised by the state, not a privilege granted by the state. Both parents matter, and we should not be afraid to say so.
(10 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI am more than happy to speak to any agencies who have new good suggestions in this space. The strategy will include children, from birth—in fact, before, because of the dangers to women when they are pregnant.
Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)
The Minister knows of the Plymouth Violence against Women and Girls Commission, which highlighted the role of pornography in VAWG. It is my view that schools should be a place where pupils can concentrate on learning and not have access to social media, including abusive forms of online pornography, which have been banned online. Australia has tackled this issue outside the classroom, as we know, by banning social media for teenagers under 16. Does the Minister agree with me that banning smartphones during the school day would not only improve pupils’ concentration, but be a practical way to stop boys in particular from accessing content that encourages them to perpetuate sexual abuse?
Regarding access to pornographic content, I was pleased this week to hear that access to the Pornhub site has gone down by 77% since age verification checks were introduced, so there have been steps in the right direction. Many of us worked on the Online Safety Act 2023, but it took 10 years to get to the point where we could say there is good data. There is no doubt that we need to look to see what is being done elsewhere in the world and make sure that the UK is the safest place to be a child.
(1 year, 5 months ago)
Commons ChamberWomen travelling alone at night should not feel afraid, yet many do. We are committed to the safer streets mission, and to halving violence against women and girls in the next decade. We will continue to work closely with the rail industry, including the British Transport Police, to do that. Work being done includes a review of the secure station scheme, which ensures that train operators meet a set of standards for security at stations; and we are taking measures that support personal safety.
Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)
My constituent Keith Levell was sexually abused at school, and was referred to as a number, not a name, during the investigations. He has been holding out for the redress scheme for victims of child sexual abuse, and for a written apology for the life-changing experiences to which he was subjected. On behalf of Keith and many others in his situation, why have the Government reportedly scrapped the Conservative plans for a redress scheme in England and Wales?
I pay tribute to the hon. Lady’s constituent, and to the many others who came forward during the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse, but what I would like to tell him is that when I came to office, there was absolutely no plan on this issue, other than a sentence to say that something would be done around the redress scheme. I have updated the House fully on the IICSA recommendations, and can tell the hon. Lady that the plan is still in train.
(1 year, 7 months ago)
Commons ChamberAbsolutely, gladly. Tamanna and Mckenzie deserve all our praise. It is infectious; the first time we do such a thing often leads to the second. The rising of the women is the rising of us all.
Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)
I am sure we all agree that securing women’s wellbeing is key to tackling violence against women and girls, so can the Minister assure women across my constituency and the country that the Labour Government, having promised to prioritise women’s health, are committed to continuing the Conservative Government’s work by making sure there is a women’s health hub in every integrated care board, to ensure holistic support for women?
A Minister to my left tells me that these hubs are already in nine out of 10 integrated care boards. I can assure the hon. Lady that I am working very closely with the Department of Health and Social Care on the violence against women and girls strategy, because there are real gaps when it comes to how domestic abuse, sexual violence and other related abuses are dealt with by our health services. That will be absolutely fundamental to both protection and prevention.