(4 weeks, 1 day ago)
Commons ChamberI thank my hon. Friend the Member for Brent East (Dawn Butler) for introducing this incredibly important International Women�s Day debate. The debate is always well attended, but it is also one of the most informative and heartfelt debates we have in Parliament. I am incredibly proud to take part as Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee.
It has been said that the Committee has had quite a flying start. We have done a lot, but I answer that with the fact that there is a lot to do. This year�s International Women�s Day theme, as has already been said, is �Accelerate Action�, and we know that we cannot slow down; we do have to accelerate, and not just with words but with action. On behalf of the whole Committee, I am proud to say that we will not be slowing down any time soon.
In less than a year, we have focused our work very much on key areas�we have also continued the fantastic work of the previous Committee�and particularly on health. Last year, we produced a report on women�s reproductive health, which we called �Medical Misogyny�. Some people said, �That�s quite strong,� but frankly we could not describe the evidence that we had seen in the inquiry as anything other than medical misogyny.
Diagnosis for adenomyosis and endometriosis takes on average eight years. That is the average, so there are people waiting much longer than eight years just for diagnosis, not treatment. That is women being ignored and being left in pain. I know women who have been eventually diagnosed with adenomyosis or endometriosis but were fobbed off time and again by medical practitioners and doctors. They were told, �Have some paracetamol, a hot water bottle and a lie down and you�ll be fine.� That, again, is an example of where women are ignored to the detriment of their health as well as our country�s health and our economy�s health.
Painful procedures such as hysteroscopies and intrauterine device fittings are still taking place for women without any offer of pain relief. A sharp pinch? No, not on my nelly is that a sharp pinch. Again, I am grateful that men do not have to endure that pain, but why is it that women still do? Even though the guidelines have changed, women are still having to go through incredibly painful procedures without the relief that they deserve.
One recommendation in our report made clear the need to educate our young people better about what to expect for women�s reproductive health�that goes for boys as well as girls. We need to end the stigma of periods, and period poverty in particular. Young people also need to know what is normal. We were often told, �It�s normal that your period will hurt. You�ll bleed and you�re going to be uncomfortable,� but it is not normal to be curled up in bed for seven days. It is not normal for periods or menstrual cycles to be so painful that they stop us from going to school, taking part in PE or going to work. All those things are not normal, yet it has been ingrained in us that it is normal for us to be in pain and that it is normal for our lives to be disrupted by our hormones and everything that is happening with our bodies. Frankly, it is not. That is why one of the recommendations made it clear that we need to do better to educate ourselves and our young people and enable our educators to have the tools and the resources they need so that the next generation of women�and young men�know exactly what happens to a woman�s body.
When it comes to research�this stuck in my mind when we were doing the report�far too much has been tailored towards men and men�s medical needs. We know that the average paracetamol dose, for example, is the correct dosage for a western male, not for a woman. It is the same with seatbelts and everything else. But here is something: five times more research goes into erectile dysfunction, which affects 19% of men, than premenstrual syndrome, which affects 90% of women. When we talk about action, we need to see it across the board, particularly in health.
There is progress�absolutely, there is�and I am so proud that we will see the Employment Rights Bill come forward next week. But there are always ways to improve�always. The Committee produced a report in January that looked specifically at miscarriage bereavement leave. That issue is very close to my heart, and I know that many inside and outside this Chamber have long campaigned for the right to grieve the loss of a pregnancy following miscarriage. We have seen some movement, and that is incredibly welcome. Now is the time for action.
There are thousands of employers out there that already offer bereavement leave for workers who miscarry. Many are private sector employers and, let us be honest, they are not doing it out of the kindness of their hearts. They are doing it because it is financially rewarding, it is reputationally good and it is good for their workers. They include massive companies such as TUI, which I went to visit last week at the hangar in Luton airport. I did not contain my inner child when I sat in a cockpit, I will tell you that, but once I gathered myself, I asked, �Where are all the women engineers?� They said that they were really struggling, as they want to have more women engineers. I also asked, �Where are your women apprentices?� because they have fantastic apprenticeships there. They are so ripe and they are ready. I asked, �What are your workplace policies for miscarriage?� They said, �Do you know what? I wish more people knew.� TUI offers time off for grief, with miscarriage bereavement leave. There are companies out there�the Co-operative Group is another�doing the right thing and trying to make sure that the workplace is right for women.
In the case of public sector employers, the NHS offers miscarriage bereavement leave for its workers. The largest public sector employer of women in our country offers bereavement leave for those who miscarry. I have had representatives sat in front of me in two different Committees�the Public Accounts Committee pre-election and now the Women and Equalities Committee �and I asked them twice how much that cost. The chief finance officer for the NHS said it was de minimis. Translation: basically nothing. It is not costing them anything to offer that; if anything, it is saving them in terms of staff retention and length of time off sick. When we do not grieve well and do not have the space and time to grieve, we store up problems in the longer term. I think society has caught up with that; it is time the law did too.
We heard in Committee about the difference that a change in law could make, from women who were brave enough to give testimony of their experiences of multiple miscarriages, and of having to drive themselves to hospital because their partner or their husband could not take time off and nearly bleeding to death along the way. I know the difference a change in law could make and how angry I was when I had to take sick pay. When I had my three miscarriages, people were really lovely and I was very open about it, but not one single person said to me, �Get better soon.� They said, �I am sorry for your loss.� If society has moved on and realises that miscarriage and pregnancy loss is a loss and not a sickness, it is time our law did as well.
My hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Erdington (Paulette Hamilton) mentioned maternal health in her intervention, and I know that we will hear more about the need to close the gap on maternal death rates for black mothers. Clo and Tinuke at Five X More are doing fantastic work on that, and I praise everybody who is working to close that gap, because it is much needed.
Yesterday, at the Select Committee, we heard evidence on female genital mutilation. There are an estimated 137,000 victims of FGM in our country, and I fear that number is much higher from the evidence we heard yesterday on the levels of under-reporting. There was much noise and much movement and progress made 10 years ago, but that progress has stalled. Some of the training manuals for doctors and midwives are 10 years out of date. They are well past time for review, and in the last 10 years, we have seen about three prosecutions for FGM. I know that prosecution is perhaps not where we need to be, and I do not want to predetermine the outcome of the report, but prevention is a huge part of the answer. We will present our report accordingly.
Another area on which we have produced a report is technology, which has already been touched upon. We produced a very chunky report on non-consensual intimate image abuse, which is a deeply personal crime that can have life-changing and life-threatening consequences, as the lived experience of inquiry witness Georgia Harrison demonstrates. The Committee heard shocking evidence about the scale and impact of NCII abuse, with a tenfold increase in just four years and more than 22,000 reported cases in 2024.
Every victim of a sexual offence deserves to be treated with respect and have their case investigated promptly and effectively by the police; however, that is not what we heard. In many cases, police treatment of victims of intimate image abuse has been characterised by a lack of understanding and in some cases misogyny, with officers choosing to patronise victims rather than support them. That is totally unacceptable and must change.
We welcome the Government�s proposals to make creating NCIIs an offence, but a legal gap remains. NCIIs can continue to circulate online years after the image was posted. Even though many sites will eventually remove the content when prompted, around 10% do not. There is not yet enough in the Government�s proposals in the Crime and Policing Bill to address that concern. We would love to see the Government bring forward amendments to the Bill to make possession of NCIIs, in addition to their creation, an offence. That will put NCIIs on the same footing as child sexual abuse material in how they are treated online and, we hope, provide the necessary encouragement to block or disrupt access to such content, particularly that which has been hosted overseas.
We are also doing work on community cohesion, gendered Islamophobia, shared parental leave and women in business and entrepreneurs, which is incredibly important because the Government are focused on growth. Women must play a significant part in that.
There is a lot that I could talk about; there is far too much in this speech already, and I am sure that there will be loads in this debate. But we live in an increasingly divisive world, and women are at the sharp end of it. Why do we even need an International Women�s Day debate? To be honest, I really wish we did not, but we need it because progress is not inevitable. We are seeing in countries such as Iraq the lowering of the age of consent to nine. �Nine� and �consent�: those two words do not go together; a child cannot give consent. Women�s bodies are being used as weapons of war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, in Kashmir, in the middle east and in Xinjiang�the list goes on. It is harder to be a woman than it should be.
One day, I really hope that we will need International Women�s Day not to highlight the problems or ask for action but to celebrate the progress. There has been progress made, and I want to end on a high note, which is sport. Women�s sport: I love it�absolutely adore it�and I know that there are some big fans here. From the Lionesses to Luton Town Ladies, there are fantastic successes. I was all excited when the Lionesses were on television, but I am so glad that when I said to my five-year-old girl, �Look at this! Look at women�s football! It�s on the television!�, she looked at me and went, �Yeah,� and shrugged her shoulders. For her, that is the norm; it is not something special. For me, it is something special to see that, but for her, it is the norm. I want it to be the norm for every little girl in our country.
I will now do something that is a little bit left-field for me. I went to a Sky Sports event and it was fantastic. Sporty Spice was there, so the 16-year-old me was even more excited than in the cockpit of a plane. There were fantastic sportswomen but also the people who support and show the sport and show that there is money and progress to be had from it and that people want to watch and consume it and cheer sportswomen on from the stands. At the start of the event, there was an incredible spoken word piece�there was also a song, but do not worry, I will not sing�by a fantastic and beautiful artist called Sophia Thakur. We all know that famous Barbie monologue; we have all heard it, haven�t we? For me, this just goes one step further, and I will end by reading just a little bit of what she said.
It is called �Gladiators�:
They say you�re strong for a girl. Or fast for a woman.
How can she be a girl? How can gold be a woman?
They call you a butterfly because they see those wings.
I know you�re the eagle type, high above these things.
They say to act like a girl, but the whole world wouldn�t be
if we deceived our power.
The land trembles as we rise from the dust came our towers.
But we meet these mountains that we are expected to climb.
But with no sweat, no muscles, no grind.
But with makeup and gentleness,
and the kind of competitiveness that�s comfortable for them and kind.
They�re like, �Would you mind maintaining your shape? Your figure 8.
Don�t get too strong. Practise a soft voice and some grace.
But still win. Still first place but like a lady might.�
Funny there. It�s when I�m my strongest, I feel most like the lady type.
When these legs activate and I can jump to crazy heights.
When these shoulders broaden and I can carry both the world and its opinions straight to the finish.
God bless the strength in these arms. Ah, how they have held me over the years.
And God bless the sisters I have found sat across from my fears.
This table is laid before us in the presence of our frenemies.
We�re celebrated for our wins. Whilst they berate our anatomy.
To be a woman is to live twice. To live firstly for the thing that you love
and then a second life for the fight.
One mind for the game and then this other for the might
that it might take to still choose this day after day.
Give the girls two gold medals.
Give the women double the pay.
Give them triple their portion.
Let your applause reverberate.
Sing her song when you sing of the greats and strike for a woman from after her name
because if she has changed the face of the whole game, she is victorious over history.
Would you like to be as you grow? Who would you like to become as you age?
Would you like to be pretty, have your face across pages, or would you like to be demure?
Known for your softness and your patience or a girl.
Tell me how would you like to become a gladiator.
To all the women gladiators in this place, past and present, and outside it�thank you. One day, International Women�s Day will be about the realisation of all our hopes and ambitions. Until that day, I am proud to be gladiators with you.
(11 months, 2 weeks ago)
General CommitteesIt is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Dr Huq. All four of the instruments before us are about ensuring that the authorities have the tools they need to combat criminals and terrorists in a digital world by giving them the powers they need to investigate, search for and seize crypto assets. As the Minister says, we know that this is a growing, fast-moving and changing area of crime and criminality, and it is vital that the relevant authorities have the powers they need to keep pace.
I will refer to each set of regulations in turn, but let me say at the outset that the Opposition do not intend to oppose them. The principles underpinning the instruments were debated during the passage of the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Act 2022 and the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023, and I will not repeat arguments made than. It is important that the authorities have codes of practice in place to guide the use of the new powers, so that we can find the appropriate balance between individual liberty and collective security.
First, under the Proceeds Of Crime Act 2002, there are regulations concerning codes of practice on the investigative powers of prosecutors, the search and recovery of crypto assets, and investigations. The reforms will enable officers to seize crypto assets and other property during the course of an investigation without having first arrested someone for an offence. They will also enable officers to seize crypto asset-related items and enable the courts to better enforce unpaid confiscation orders against a defendant’s crypto assets, which is really important.
Can the Minister clarify whether non-fungible content is included in the phrase crypto asset, which is a well-established term? Non-fungible tokens were not something that interested me, so my position is not a universal one, but they were of some public interest. I know that they hold some value because they are bought and sold, although not in the way they were as recently as a year ago. I am interested to see if they are covered. I think they are, and rightly so. In general, these provisions are an important clarification of authorities’ powers, so that individuals who are subject to those authorities’ investigative powers will have clarity about what they can and cannot do, which must be right.
Secondly, in relation to the POCA 2002 and the Terrorism Act 2000, we have regulations concerning a code of practice for information orders. The regulations deal with new information order powers to support the NCA’s operational strategic analysis of information relevant to money laundering or suspected money laundering and/or terrorist financing or suspected terrorist financing. That seems clear and sensible to us. There are also regulations in relation to the Terrorism Act 2000 concerning a code of practice for authorised officers; again, the clarity there is to be welcomed. There are reforms to the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, again enabling officers to seize and detain crypto assets, so I hope that the Minister will also give clarity around the status of NFTs and non-fungible content in that context.
As we have said previously in debates on these matters, we welcome the Government bringing forward measures on crypto assets. The technology is changing and fast-paced, and so is the usage of criminals in that space. We must have a digital approach, not an analogue approach, to freezing and seizing assets, and this instrument has found the balance.
My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech. I want to come in on that particular point, because much attention has been given to terrorist and criminal organisations, but what about individuals? A number of individuals, including some of my constituents, have been defrauded of cryptocurrency, and I am intrigued to see what we can do to support them.
My hon. Friend makes an important intervention. We know of individuals whose lives have been ruined. They may have lost their business or their house because of such transactions. Ensuring that the authorities have the relevant investigative powers to follow these new types of crime is really important. We can have a degree of confidence that these instruments move us forward in that direction.
I have a couple more questions to the Minister to get some reassurance; they follow on neatly from what my hon. Friend said. It is important that we ensure that the relevant authorities have the right powers, and the right capacity, resources, knowledge and experience. There has been a consultation on the codes of practice, but what consultation or conversations has the Minister or his right hon. Friend the Security Minister had with relevant authorities, such as the NCA, about their capacity to deal with this growing threat?
Similarly, on consultation more generally, each of the explanatory memorandums to the instruments has a section 10 on consultation. A consultation clearly has taken place, and it seems to have been a valuable one. It makes note of some of the changes that have happened as a result, which is always a positive, but was there anything in those consultations that the Government were not minded to accept? Can the Minister tell us any of those things? I will not say anything more than that, but hopefully he will be able to address those questions.
(1 year, 1 month ago)
Commons ChamberSince 2019, we have invested £160 million in 20 violence reduction units across England and Wales, and a further £55 million has been committed this year. Violence reduction units have reached more than 270,000 young people. They bring together specialists from health, the police, local government and community organisations not just to tackle violent crime, but to identify the young people who are most at risk of being drawn into it and provide evidence-based interventions to support them.
I can reassure the hon. Gentleman that, under our tackling organised exploitation programme, we are keenly aware of the difference between victims and criminals, and that children are being drawn into criminal enterprises and gangs at ever-younger ages. I want to provide reassurance that where we have evidence of that happening, the child should be referred through the national referral mechanism—the framework for identifying victims of exploitation by county lines groups and equivalents. That can be done with or without the child’s consent, and it provides the police with a vital tool not just to protect the child but to disrupt the criminal activity in which they are being enlisted.
Last week, Bedfordshire police reported that two drug dealers who had trafficked a vulnerable 15-year-old child from Luton to sell drugs were sentenced under modern slavery laws. Although that conviction is of course welcome, I think we can all agree that this is not just slavery; it is the despicable act of grooming children into a life of drugs, gangs and violence. Why do not the Government back our plans for a new specific offence to lock up such criminals for exactly what they are doing and stop them exploiting children and young people for a life of crime?
I agree with much of what the hon. Lady says. The Prime Minister implemented new measures to deal with child sexual exploitation in April of last year, but part of that deals with organised exploitation, which goes wider. I am glad to hear that those two criminals were convicted under modern slavery laws. I want to reassure her that, under our Criminal Justice Bill, which is making its way through the House, grooming gangs will receive enhanced sentences.
(1 year, 1 month ago)
Commons ChamberI agree with my hon. Friend. As the largest city in the country with more than 9 million people, London will always have higher statistics, but it is being let down. Londoners have constantly been let down for eight years because of the current Mayor’s failure to get a grip of knife crime. Too many families across London have been affected by knife crime and have lost their beloved children.
There were 156 knife offences in December 2023 alone. That will not stop unless we get a grip of it. It has to be a holistic approach. It is not just about stricter sentences; they have a part to play in the criminal justice system, but we must get to the nub of why young people carry knives in the first place. I have always believed that someone who carries a knife is more likely to use one. I am so concerned that today, too many young people feel that they have to carry a knife for their own protection. We must persuade our young people that there is an alternative. We have heard about different approaches from several Members. We should learn from what is happening in Scotland, which has a lot to offer.
We need a public health and community approach. When I was cabinet member for public protection at Westminster council in 2013, I was shocked to find that Westminster—a borough that people think of as affluent, with areas such as Mayfair, Belgravia and the west end—was No. 3 in the Met’s serious youth violence table in 2013. We were even higher than Hackney. I remember going to see the then deputy Mayor for policing, now my right hon. Friend the Member for North West Hampshire (Kit Malthouse), who told me that if I did not get on top of the problem immediately, it would only get worse, and it would never change.
I immediately worked with my brilliant officers at Westminster City Council and the police to establish the first ever integrated gangs unit. I set up a scheme called “your choice”, because I wanted to send a message to young people that they had a choice: they could be involved in gangs and knife crime, but that would end either in the morgue or in prison. There were alternative ways, where young people could work with us. I was clear that we had to understand why young people were involved. I also sent a message to the parents. Often, parents do not know what their young people are getting involved in when they are out, and they do not know how to handle the problem. I offered a helping hand to parents. I am delighted to say that we went straight back down those tables within a year to where we are usually, around 16th out of 19.
There needs to be a full approach, where all the agencies work together. The integrated gangs unit included the police, probation, special needs, schools and social workers. Interestingly, we discovered that a lot of young people on the periphery of knife crime had speech and language issues. They could not properly communicate, and they had not really progressed since primary school. They had had a nightmare moving into secondary school, and they had been lost in the system. We grabbed those young men, and I am delighted that we improved the situation. We have to work together. It should not be a political issue but a community issue where we all work together, as our young people deserve.
We have heard about violence reduction units. We have one in London, run by a very impressive woman, Lib Peck, whom I have known for a long time. She is not getting the backing and seriousness from the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan. In 2018, he held a knife crime summit just before the local elections. The then Home Secretary attended, as did the Metropolitan Police Commissioner and the deputy Mayor for policing. The Mayor chaired it—he did not speak; he was not held to account. I will never forget that he never allowed himself to be held to account on the situation. He has got to be held to account.
We talk about accountability, but it works both ways. I agree with everyone who has said that the result is not political, as it affects all political stripes, but we have got here because of political decision making. The hon. Member talks about children not being able to speak or read or write—that is the political decision of 14 years of this Government eroding our education system. We talk about not enough resources for the police—that is a decision to erode community policing. Will the hon. Member take some responsibility for 14 years of this?
It is an honour to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry South (Zarah Sultana) and to be the last Back-Bench contributor to this debate, which on the whole—with one exception—has been thoughtful, insightful, heartfelt and really sensitive.
I rise to speak today on behalf of my constituents in Luton North, who I know care a great deal about knife crime—when I say “care”, I mean that they are worried and scared about knife crime. There is no doubt that knife crime has become a national crisis, increasing by 77% since 2015. It is a scourge on our society and it has tragic and often fatal consequences. Knife crime not only takes lives, but devastates families, destroys futures and ambitions, and has a detrimental ripple effect on all our communities. Unfortunately, we know the impact of this all too well in Luton, as my hon. Friend the Member for Luton South (Rachel Hopkins) has already highlighted.
In September 2023 alone, in just one month, there were five stabbings in our town, one of which tragically led to my constituent, 16-year-old Ashraf Habimana, losing his life. Two loving parents lost their son, Ashraf’s teachers and friends lost his bright and energetic personality, and our community has lost another young person under appallingly violent and, importantly, avoidable circumstances. His family and friends now have to grieve the loss of Ashraf and wait hopefully to see justice served, but the lasting trauma of this event will remain with them and our community forever.
Two years ago, another 16-year-old boy, Humza Hussain, was stabbed to death outside school—what another tragic loss, what another waste of life, what another future stolen. Our young people are most at risk when it comes to knife crime. In the year ending September 2022, there were more than 46,000 recorded offences involving a knife or sharp instrument in England and Wales, with young men and boys most likely to be both the perpetrators and victims of this crime.
I recently had the honour of meeting staff from Bedfordshire’s brilliant violence and exploitation reduction unit with my hon. Friend the Member for Luton South to find out more about their “Just Drop It” knife campaign. At its heart is the voice and experience of a mum, Roseann, who tragically lost her young son, Azaan “AJ” Kaleem, in 2018. Too often nothing is done when there are signs that a young person is getting into trouble, being groomed by gangs, or falling into danger online. To me, the important part of today’s debate is about the child exploitation side of it—the side of it on which this Government have lagged behind. I do not care whether it has “Labour” or “Conservative” on the front of it. Parents, families and communities just want it done. To me, the people who prey on innocent young lives, regardless of their intentions—whether it is crime, sexual exploitation or drugs—are all the same and we should treat them exactly like that.
When teenagers say that they do not feel safe, or that they are struggling themselves with trauma or abuse, no one listens and no help is provided. That is what we are up against. The “Just Drop It” strategy aims to tackle these issues, providing accessible opportunities for young people to help them achieve their potential, ensuring that they feel supported and safe, and helping them to realise that there is an alternative to a life of knife crime and violence. All of these young boys and men leave families mourning the loss of life and the loss of a future that should have been bright and, importantly, safe.
The brilliant organisation, Boxing Saves Lives, works with hundreds of young people in Luton. It was set up and is now run by the inspirational JP, who often highlights the work that rightly goes on tackling violence against women and girls, and asks what about violence against boys and men. I could not agree with him more. Far too many young boys are exposed to violence and fear from a very young age. What is the Minister doing to tackle that? If the Government are taking any action, why is it not working?
If these deaths were as a result of a physical illness killing our young people, teams of doctors and researchers would be working day and night to find a cure. But we already know the cure; we know the lessons that need to be learned. The cure is all the things that have been stripped from our communities over the past 14 years: decent community policing; youth centres; decent schools; Sure Start centres; decent housing; mental health support; and tackling poverty. As my hon. Friend the Member for Luton South says, shockingly, there are more food banks than police stations.
The results of knife crime have no political stripe, but how we have got here does. These were all political choices that led to the perfect storm of knife crime that we see in our society today. When we held community meetings after young Ashraf’s death, hundreds of people came and they said, “Here we are again”. Sadly, they were right. Sadly, until all the things that we know work are put in place, we will be here yet again. When the Minister stands at the Dispatch Box, I ask him please not to give us more warm words that lead to cold comfort for those families, as I know that it is only a matter of time before we are consoling yet another mother in Luton. Families are losing their children, children are losing their friends and whole parts of the country are losing their future. That situation should shame a Government of any colour, so I ask the Minister again please not to get up at that Dispatch Box and tell us that all is rosy, because it is not.
I am grateful for the fact that, all the while this Tory Government fail our communities, we have people in Luton such as Haleema Ali, who is fundraising for critical bleed kits in our town, and the Wingman Mentors, a not-for-profit organisation that works with vulnerable young people who are on the cusp of getting involved with crime, carrying knives, and serious violence. It has launched a campaign to install critical bleed kits in strategic locations across our town. The kits contain essential supplies to control severe bleeding effectively and can be used in the event of an emergency incident, whether a road traffic incident, a dog attack or a knife crime. I would be grateful to hear whether the Minister will be supporting that campaign. The organisation’s founders, Si and Michelle, believe that those kits are just as vital and lifesaving as defibrillators. They are also delivering training for people to familiarise themselves with bleed kits and their practical use, to give those who may be on the scene as zero responders the necessary skills possibly to save a life. I pay tribute to the vital work that Wingman Mentors and others are doing, but they should not have to rely on donations and funding from local businesses to make the installation of bleed kits a reality.
Yes, we have heard that knife crime is a cross-party problem and that we have to work across organisations and across parties—and I am happy to do so. However, the Government in their response to this issue have been wholly inadequate. The serious violence strategy is more than five years out of date. The serious violence taskforce was disbanded and everyone knows from their own communities that too little is being done to support young people to move away from violence and crime. Why is it that we have to continue with this farce of police funding in which Bedfordshire Police is classified as a rural police force? We have Luton, Dunstable and Bedford all within that area. Will the Minister please dare to comment on that and say when the farce of rural funding for Bedfordshire Police will end?
Much more needs to be done and we need a proper plan with meaningful funding behind it to make these changes. I am therefore proud to support Labour’s commitment to tackling this issue at its source, establishing a new Young Futures programme to stop young people being drawn into crime, implementing a total crackdown on the availability of knives on our streets and imposing tougher sentences for perpetrators. Knife crime and violence have no place in our society. We all have a responsibility to tackle the problem within our communities, but tackling knife crime no longer just means learning lessons; it means acting on them so that we are not standing here again speaking of our constituents, of loved ones tragically lost to knife crime and of those left behind who are traumatised and changed forever.
I am grateful to have the opportunity to talk about this important topic. I thank Members on both sides who have contributed thoughtfully to this afternoon’s debate, which is of huge importance to our constituents up and down the country.
Too many families have been touched by the tragedy of knife crime and the unspeakable agony of losing a loved one. In fact, by coincidence—it was arranged before this debate was scheduled—I met yesterday with a few families from across London who have lost sons, brothers and, in one case, a daughter to knife crime. That group of families included the immediate family and cousins of Elianne Andam, a 15-year-old girl from Croydon—the borough that I represent in Parliament—who was tragically murdered on Wednesday 27 September last year. Her alleged assailant is now in custody. I remember attending Elianne’s funeral in Croydon a few weeks later. The outpouring of grief from the whole community, particularly from her parents, Michael and Dorcas, and her little brother, Kobi, moved everybody who attended on that Saturday morning a couple of months ago—I think more than 1,000 people were in attendance.
Nothing illustrated more powerfully how important this topic is than seeing those family members and that whole community united in grief at the loss of Elianne. Of course, like the Andam family, too many families up and down the country, in London and elsewhere, have suffered tragedy in that way. It is up to all of us in public life—whether here in Parliament, in city government, police and crime commissioners, in local councils and so on—to do everything we possibly can to deal with this issue. It is in that spirit that many Members have approached the debate.
We have heard quite a lot about figures. Everyone knows that we need to do more, but any informed debate has to start with a proper understanding of what the figures are. A number of Opposition Members have quoted the figure of knife crime being up 77% since 2015. That is a police recorded crime figure. A number of other figures are available. The Office for National Statistics says:
“police recorded crime does not tend to be a good indicator of general trends in crime”
for higher-volume offences—not my words, but those of the ONS. Let me explain why: police recorded crime depends on the propensity of the public to report it and on how good a job the police do at recording it when it is reported.
I did promise to give way to the hon. Member for Luton North, so I will do so.
I thank the Minister for being generous with his time. On police recorded crime, the 77% figure is surely the bare minimum given that the level of under-reporting, particularly among young people, is extremely high. Does he agree that the Government’s claim that knife crime has somehow gone down will sit like a bucket of cold sick with communities such as mine, which know that the scourge of knife crime is rife under the Tory Government?
(1 year, 9 months ago)
Commons ChamberI can give the hon. Lady some advice for free. The best way to stop the use of hotels is to stop the boats, and I encourage her to back our legislation, which will enable us to stop the boats and stop the use of hotels.
I want to raise the use of divisive language by the Home Secretary throughout this statement on immigration, and a few weeks ago when she described multiculturalism as a “recipe for communal disaster”. As a product of multiculturalism myself and representing Luton North, a town proudly multicultural, let me tell her that she is wrong. There are thousands like me from multicultural families. Does she really want to deny our right to exist? Is not the truth that the use of such vile rhetoric is just a cynical ploy to turn people against each other, rather than on those truly responsible for the backlog, the boats and the needless deaths—this Conservative Government?
I prefer to focus on the problem and the solutions to the problem. The problem we have here—one on which the British public overwhelmingly support the Government’s plans—is to stop the boats. The Leader of the Opposition does not even really want to talk about it, but this Prime Minister and this Government have delivered a plan, and are delivering on our plan to stop the boats and to deliver for the British people.
(1 year, 11 months ago)
Commons ChamberI join my right hon. Friend in calling for the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan to reconsider his unwise plans. As I said, the Metropolitan police has by far the highest per capita funding of any force in the country. I do not think any of us want police stations to close, so I join her in calling on Sadiq Khan to reconsider.
After years of devastating cuts, any extra police officers are welcome, but it is not just about numbers; it is about quality and experience too. Can the Minister confirm how many new police officers are student officers, not yet qualified, such as the 300 in Bedfordshire? Does he agree that Luton, Bedford and Dunstable are clearly not rural areas? When will the farce of funding Bedfordshire police as a rural force end, so that the police finally have the resources to keep people safe in Luton?
As I am sure the hon. Lady knows, Bedfordshire police has additional support through the police special grant, giving it extra money particularly to fight organised criminality. I corresponded with Bedfordshire’s excellent police and crime commissioner on that topic just recently. I am glad that she raised the question of police officer numbers in Bedford, because Bedfordshire has around 200 extra officers compared with the number under the last Labour Government.
(2 years ago)
Commons ChamberWe have heard a shamefully grim level of debate from some Government Members. The debate has lacked compassion and logic, but I want to start on a positive. Last night, something truly historic happened: Ke Huy Quan became the first east and south-east Asian actor to win an Oscar. He said:
“My journey started on a boat. I ended up in a refugee camp….They say stories like this only happen in the movies…This is the American dream.”
Why is that story of success not a British dream, especially when people such Mo Farah have had a similar experience, filling stadiums, smashing records and being wrapped in a Union flag? Why is that hope and aspiration crushed before it even starts? Because of fear and failure —13 years of Tory failure, to be exact; a failure to provide any sense of international leadership or to negotiate workable deals with other countries. And at home, this Government are making 40% fewer asylum decisions a year than they were in 2015, leaving 160,000 people waiting in limbo for much longer and pushing up accommodation costs. This immigration Bill is based on fear—the fear of the Prime Minister and Home Secretary losing a grip on their own party.
People of faith often speak about the opposite of fear—hope. And they have spoken out against the Bill. The Board of Deputies has shared its concerns and, earlier today, I met members of the Jain community, whose focus is on compassion for all living things, not on this. Last June, all the bishops in the House of Lords signed a letter raising alarm about the Rwanda policy. Today, the Archbishop of York joined the Muslim Council of Britain and 350 other charities and faith organisations to condemn the Bill, saying it was “immoral and inept”.
Normally, that level of criticism would make a Government stop and think, but we are not in ordinary times. Instead, we have yet another Prime Minister who is so desperate to stay in power and keep the Conservative party together that he is willing to tear a country apart. That is the base level of the Bill—the Government blaming others and reaching for unworkable, inhumane covers for their own wretched failure.
My grandparents’ generation, which fought in the war, will not be fooled, and neither will generation Z. Last week, Luton Sixth Form College celebrated its culture day, which was beautiful, exciting and harmonious. Those young people know that there is strength in diversity, not fear. That is true strength. What we hear today is fear, the only card that this clapped-out Conservative Government have left to play. As our faith communities, the generation that fought against division and hatred, and our young people all know, Britain is so much better than this Bill, and our country is so much better than the Conservative Government give it credit for.
(2 years, 2 months ago)
Commons ChamberMy right hon. Friend is right—there is huge innovation and good practice around the country when it comes to local policing. Police forces are using powers that the Government have given them, and using the numbers and resources we have given them, to be a bit more responsive and more visible, and to ensure that people feel safer and that crime is falling.
I will carry on and come back to the hon. Lady. From Greater Manchester to Kent, and from the Thames valley to the west midlands, on my visits around the country I have seen so many brave men and women join the police, coming forward in their droves to protect the public. On behalf of the British people, I thank them. Nineteen forces have already hit record levels, and the Met, Kent, Norfolk, South Wales, Suffolk, Warwickshire and West Yorkshire police all have the highest numbers of police officers in their history—higher than in 2019, higher than in 2015, higher than in 2010, and higher than the years when Labour was in charge.
(2 years, 4 months ago)
Commons ChamberI thank the hon. Gentleman for that point of order. I am not responsible for social media, oddly enough, as he may appreciate.
Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I totally respect and fully take on board the advice from Mr Speaker’s office for conduct in this Chamber, but outside this place thousands of people are struggling to pay their mortgage or to afford one home, let alone 17, and they may have found that not declarable, but relevant. I would be grateful for your advice—[Interruption.] I would be grateful for your advice—[Interruption.]
Order. The hon. Lady has the right to have her say—[Interruption.] Members should not challenge me.
I would be grateful, Madam Deputy Speaker, for your advice on how Members like me should respond when the hon. Member for Sedgefield (Paul Howell) tells me to “shut up” in this Chamber, where I speak for my constituents. Now he is attempting to shut me up online as well. What message does this send to women who want to be in politics when they see men like that? [Interruption.]
Order. I say to the hon. Gentleman that that is not how we want to behave.
(2 years, 4 months ago)
Commons ChamberI would be very happy to meet my hon. Friend so we can discuss the issue and he can represent the views of his constituents. I can inform the House that I have agreed with my officials at the Home Office that, as a matter of course, all Members of Parliament should be informed of new facilities being opened in their constituency ahead of time. All local authorities should be informed and proper engagement undertaken with them so that we can better understand the specific issues and provide the support that might be needed. It is not right that MPs and councils find out on social media or third hand and I intend to bring that to an end.
Some are heralding the horrors at Manston as the death of compassionate conservatism. The rest of us knew it never existed, or at least not for a very long time. Since the last Prime Minister took office just weeks ago, we have seen the Home Secretary describe people fleeing war as invading our country. Lethal levels of overcrowding at the Manston camp, traumatised people dumped at Victoria station with nowhere to sleep and child refugees sexually assaulted—is that the compassion that the Prime Minister speaks of? If not, how will those shameful examples be rectified?
The hon. Lady should pay closer attention to what is actually happening. I have visited Manston and met members of staff who are supporting those individuals at Western Jet Foil. I spent Saturday night at our immigration removal centre in west London, and in every one of those situations Border Force, Home Office, military and other personnel are providing decent, compassionate care to individuals who are coming to this country. But humanity and decency does not mean naivety, and that is where we take a different approach from the hon. Lady. Some 30% of those who have crossed the channel this year alone have come from Albania, which is a demonstrably safe country. We have to draw a distinction, or else we simply will not be able to help people who do deserve our care and support.