Justice Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Home Office
Friday 1st March 2024

(8 months, 1 week ago)

Ministerial Corrections
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The following are extracts from the sixth sitting of the Public Bill Committee on the Criminal Justice Bill, on 11 January 2024.
Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

The point was made about a person having a difficult experience of litigation against the Home Office, and we heard the example of the high-profile case related to the effect of an Ofsted inspection; there could be a number of other scenarios. I think we have to look at clause 11(1)(b) when we are thinking about those. We are not considering simply whether the perpetrator is said to have done an act that is capable of encouraging self-harm. By the way, I think that when that is considered by the court, it is not going to include something unpleasant that makes a person feel terrible and leads them to a bad place. That is not the purpose of the clause. In the context of this legislation, “encouraging” has to mean a direct incitement.

[Official Report, Criminal Justice Public Bill Committee, 11 January 2024, Vol. 743, c. 163.]

Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Newbury (Laura Farris):

An error has been identified in my response to the speech by the hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley (Jess Phillips).

The correct information should have been:

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

The point was made about a person having a difficult experience of litigation against the Home Office, and we heard the example of the high-profile case related to the effect of an Ofsted inspection; there could be a number of other scenarios. I think we have to look at clause 11(1)(b) when we are thinking about those. We are not considering simply whether the perpetrator is said to have done an act that is capable of encouraging self-harm. By the way, I think that when that is considered by the court, it is not going to include something unpleasant that makes a person feel terrible and leads them to a bad place. That is not the purpose of the clause.

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

We are also creating two offences to do with the installation of spycams, which I am afraid we see more and more of in cases going through the courts: an offence of installing, adapting, preparing or maintaining equipment with the intention of taking or recording intimate photograph or film; and an offence of supplying for that purpose. To be clear, it will not be necessary for the image to have been taken; if equipment was installed for that purpose, that is enough to meet the requirements of the offence.

[Official Report, Criminal Justice Public Bill Committee, 11 January 2024, Vol. 743, c. 166.]

Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Newbury (Laura Farris):

An error has been identified in my speech.

The correct information should have been:

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

We are also creating an offence to do with the installation of spycams, which I am afraid we see more and more of in cases going through the courts. It is an offence of installing, adapting, preparing or maintaining equipment with the intention of taking or recording intimate photograph or film. To be clear, it will not be necessary for the image to have been taken; if equipment was installed for that purpose, that is enough to meet the requirements of the offence.

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

One of the challenges in adopting a definition of “intimate” that includes, for example, the removal of a hijab is that we are creating a criminal offence of that image being shared. It would not be obvious to anyone in this country who received a picture of a woman they did not know with her hair exposed that they were viewing an intimate image and committing a criminal offence.

[Official Report, Criminal Justice Public Bill Committee, 11 January 2024, Vol. 743, c. 168.]

Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Newbury (Laura Farris):

An error has been identified in my response to the speech by the hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley (Jess Phillips).

The correct information should have been:

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

One of the challenges in adopting a definition of “intimate” that includes, for example, the removal of a hijab is that we are creating a criminal offence of that image being shared. It would not be obvious to anyone in this country who received a picture of a woman they did not know with her hair exposed that they were viewing an intimate image and if they shared it would potentially be committing a criminal offence.

Criminal Justice Bill (eighth sitting)

The following are extracts from the eighth sitting of the Public Bill Committee on the Criminal Justice Bill, on 16 January 2024.

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

Around a quarter of all homicides in England and Wales are classed as domestic. In other words, the perpetrator is a partner or former partner of the victim.

[Official Report, Criminal Justice Public Bill Committee, Vol. 743, 16 January 2024, c. 257.]

Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Newbury (Laura Farris):

An error has been identified in my speech.

The correct information should have been:

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

Around a quarter of all homicides in England and Wales are classed as domestic. In other words, the perpetrator is a partner, former partner or relative of the victim.

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

We have also introduced a new statutory aggravating factor for murders involving gratuitous and excessive force, sometimes referred to as overkill. That is something that Clare Wade found to be strikingly prevalent in not only domestic murders, but all the cases she assessed.

[Official Report, Criminal Justice Public Bill Committee, 16 January 2024, Vol. 743, c. 258.]

Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Newbury (Laura Farris):

An error has been identified in my speech.

The correct information should have been:

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

We have also introduced a new statutory aggravating factor for murders involving gratuitous and excessive force, sometimes referred to as overkill. That is something that Clare Wade found to be strikingly prevalent in domestic murders.

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

A new mitigating factor will apply in cases where the victim of an abusive partner or family member has killed their abuser, in recognition of their experience as a victim of abuse preceding the killing, which is exactly what happened in the Sally Challen case. This is consistent with the conclusion of the Court of Appeal—it is essentially taking the court’s conclusion and making it a statutory mitigating factor.

[Official Report, Criminal Justice Public Bill Committee, 16 January 2024, Vol. 743, c. 258.]

Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Newbury (Laura Farris):

An error has been identified in my speech.

The correct information should have been:

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

A new mitigating factor will apply in cases where the victim of an abusive partner or family member has killed their abuser, in recognition of their experience as a victim of abuse preceding the killing, which is what happened in the Sally Challen case.

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

It is well known that this is the Ben Kinsella amendment, which Jack Straw introduced in 2007 in response to a campaign fought very passionately by Ben’s sister, Brooke, and his family.

[Official Report, Criminal Justice Public Bill Committee, 16 January 2024, Vol. 743, c. 266.]

Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Newbury (Laura Farris):

An error has been identified in my speech.

The correct information should have been:

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

It is well known that this is the Ben Kinsella amendment, which Jack Straw introduced in 2010 in response to a campaign fought very passionately by Ben’s sister, Brooke, and his family.

Criminal Justice Bill (10th sitting)

The following are extracts from the 10th sitting of the Public Bill Committee on the Criminal Justice Bill, on 18 January 2024.

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

We have strengthened the statutory guidance to require agencies to consider discretionary management under MAPPA in all domestic abuse cases. In the last reporting year, we have seen a 30% increase in the take-up of that offer. For that reason, we consider it appropriate to put it in the Bill.

[Official Report, Criminal Justice Public Bill Committee, 18 January 2024, Vol. 743, c. 301.]

Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Newbury (Laura Farris):

An error has been identified in my speech.

The correct information should have been:

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

We have strengthened the statutory guidance to require agencies to consider discretionary management under MAPPA in all domestic abuse cases. In the last reporting year, we have seen a 37% increase in the take-up of that offer. For that reason, we consider it appropriate to put it in the Bill.

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

I thank the shadow Minister for his speech and for supporting the clause. In answer to his final criticism that we have abandoned women and girls, the Serious Crime Act that created the offence of coercive, controlling behaviour received Royal Assent in February 2015.

[Official Report, Criminal Justice Public Bill Committee, 18 January 2024, Vol. 743, c. 304.]

Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Newbury (Laura Farris):

An error has been identified in my response to the speech by the hon. Member for Stockton North (Alex Cunningham).

The correct information should have been:

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

I thank the shadow Minister for his speech and for supporting the clause. In answer to his final criticism that we have abandoned women and girls, the Serious Crime Act that created the offence of coercive, controlling behaviour received Royal Assent in March 2015.

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

In answer to the hon. Lady’s question, in the data we have, which is from 2022, 566 people were convicted of coercive control, and it is estimated that, as she suggested, around 200 would be serving 12 months or more and would have been eligible for MAPPA management. We simply make the point that the MAPPA framework is used for the most serious offenders; whether it is a sexual, violent or terrorist offence, people qualify for MAPPA if their sentence is one year or more.

[Official Report, Criminal Justice Public Bill Committee, 18 January 2024, Vol. 743, c. 304.]

Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Newbury (Laura Farris):

An error has been identified in my response to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley (Jess Phillips).

The correct information should have been:

Laura Farris Portrait Laura Farris
- Hansard - -

In answer to the hon. Lady’s question, in the data we have, which is from 2022, 566 people were convicted of coercive control, and it is estimated that, as she suggested, around 200 would be serving 12 months or more and would have been eligible for MAPPA management. We simply make the point that the MAPPA framework is used for the most serious sexual, violent and terrorist offenders, and those convicted of violent offences must have received a sentence of 12 months’ imprisonment or more to qualify.