Business of the House
Debate between Tessa Munt and Lucy Powell(3 weeks, 2 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lucy Powell
I thank my hon. Friend for that very powerful question and contribution. I am really sorry to hear about the suffering that his constituent Rod Wainwright continues to suffer, having been in attendance at the Grenfell tower tragedy. The Prime Minister has made it clear that he still feels that survivors and the bereaved have been let down badly before, during and after, and that includes those who attended as fire officers and others. There will be another debate on the Grenfell inquiry report in due course and I will make sure he is aware of that when it happens.
Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)
In August, the Ministry of Justice informed Bristol Crown court that it would have to close courtrooms and save over 400 sitting days before March 2025. Last week, the difficult decision was made to remove 40 trials listed between now and the end of March. All the witnesses and defence had been told that their trials would take place. Most have been waiting over a year—two years, in some cases. Many of the 40 cases are rape and serious sexual offences cases where the accused is on bail. The cases will not be relisted until at least October 2025. May we have a debate, so that the victims of rape and sexual abuse can understand why justice is so dreadfully delayed, and how the Government will tackle the court backlog?
Lucy Powell
The hon. Lady raises a really important point. She will know that this Government are committed to ensuring that there is justice for women and girls who are subject to rape and violence. It is a scar on our society that that still takes so long. She will know that the court backlog that she describes is another part of the legacy that this Government are trying to deal with, along with the prisons crisis and others in our criminal justice sector. We will have Justice questions next week, and I am sure that the Secretary of State will be pleased to answer her questions then.
Business of the House
Debate between Tessa Munt and Lucy Powell(1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lucy Powell
I wholeheartedly encourage all the association members to vote for Pride in Gloucestershire. I am sure that the event would really help to put Gloucester on the map, would bring a huge amount of interest and, and would support the local economy. As the MP for Manchester Pride, I know how important these events are, and I wish my hon. Friend and his town all the best with that.
Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)
In broad daylight, in a public place, my constituent was attacked by a man who is well known to the police. When he realised that he was being videoed and the police were being called, he lashed out and threatened to find my constituent, slit his throat and burn his house down. Early police advice was that my constituent’s name need never be disclosed, but now Avon and Somerset police say that his full name will have to be disclosed in court. He does not want to expose his family to the threats that were made. The case will collapse without the protection of anonymity for victims. Can we have a debate on offering greater public protection to victims in court, thereby bolstering public confidence in policing and our courts system?
Lucy Powell
This sounds like a horrific incident in the hon. Member’s constituency. I am really sorry to hear of it, and I hope that she will pass on our best to her constituents. These issues have been raised many times, and we have had many debates on them. The Government are committed to introducing a victims and sentencing Bill in this Session, wherein the issue of anonymity for victims will be widely discussed.
Business of the House
Debate between Tessa Munt and Lucy Powell(2 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)
The Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 introduced the requirement that directors and other individuals verify their identity before being listed at Companies House. I have found company directors whose registered addresses simply do not exist, which at the least means that papers cannot be served, and at the worst enables fraud and other crime. May we have a debate on the progress of two things: the secondary legislation that needs to be passed for those basic checks to take place; and an update on how Companies House’s systems are progressing to allow directors’ identities to be checked?
Lucy Powell
The hon. Lady raises an important technical matter, and I will certainly look into the progress of that statutory instrument. Given that she has such expertise and diligence in this space, she might want to consider going on the Public Accounts Committee or other Committees as those places come up in the coming weeks.